FANDOM



Archives
  • Archive 1 (BCC - Before Cursed Child: AD2016)
  • Archive 2 (CC to FB: June 2016 - 18 November 2016)

Hey

:-) Starstuff (Owl me!) 09:54, November 20, 2016 (UTC)

Customs Official

Could you put a character template for the Customs Official, please? (Hobbiton777 (talk) 23:44, November 20, 2016 (UTC))

Yes, thank you! Just need to put in some references as well as a short history of him during the film. (Hobbiton777 (talk) 00:08, November 21, 2016 (UTC))

Credence

I don't recall a statement from Rowling that Credence has a large role to play in future films. All I can remember is this summary of an Entertainment Weekly article, where it's stated that Credence is "apparently a character that becomes notable in the Harry Potter universe," but it's from a year ago, when information on the film was just starting to come out. Chances are that the filmmakers decided to change Credence's fate after the article was written, or the article's author(s) simply got their facts incorrect. Every indication from the movie/script is that Credence is dead. Starstuff (Owl me!) 09:00, November 21, 2016 (UTC)

Talk Page

Can you give your two cents on the Theseus Scamander talk page?--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 15:15, November 21, 2016 (UTC)

Fawley source

I was able to tell due to the face of the actor Richard Clothier. (Hobbiton777 (talk) 17:20, November 21, 2016 (UTC))

Here's the proof:http://www.unitedagents.co.uk/richard-clothier (Hobbiton777 (talk) 22:36, November 21, 2016 (UTC))

Wanted posters

Actors known to have played criminals on the wanted posters in Beasts in case we want to try to put names to faces: Aileen Archer (profile with photos), Abigayle Honeywill, John Murray, Anick Wiget. Starstuff (Owl me!) 02:57, November 22, 2016 (UTC)

Actors Nationalities

Wikipedia nationality guidelines do not state that only English actors should be labeled as British. If we are to follow the same style across the whole wiki then all English actors should have their nationality listed as English and not British as have been done with Scottish actors.  Either change the English actors to English, or have all British actors listed as British. Continuing to have only some of the United Kingdom actors/actresses listed as British and the others as their respective Union nations is inconsistant, controversial and seen as very political. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Albion85 (talkcontribs).


Thanks for your thoughts on the issue. In my opinion I would prefer all British actors to be labeled as British. It certainly is a controversial issue, which is why I tend to stear towards the practice of one label, despite the recommendation of not enforcing uniformity. Due to conflicting opinions I would refer to official and legal definitions of nationality within the United Kingdom which is those who are a citizen of the UK are a British national. English, Welsh, Scottish and N Irish are seen as ethnicities and not nationalities, therefore labelling nationality as English or Scottish etc is, while perhaps satisfying some feelings of some groups, is not factually correct by official standards. It's using incorrect information to pander to one side of the issue, while ignoring those on the other. That being said, if it is indeed impossible to stick to the official nationality of British for UK citizens, then the second best option would be to use the individual countries for everyone i.e all English actors as English. I think the biggest issue here is having everyone from England labeled as British and everyone from Scotland labeled as Scottish appears to invoke a political statement, not to mention appears inconsistent with styling. Your thoughts? Albion85 (talk) 04:40, December 2, 2016 (UTC)


On the whole, I agree with Wikipedia's UK Nationality guidelines. I think specifying the consistency, when it's easily verifiable, is the best approach, but there's no need for 100% uniformity since enforcing that seems to only bring about counterproductive edit warring over something that's frankly trivial. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 12:55, December 2, 2016 (UTC)

HP/Hannah Montana

Have you gotten the chance to see Fantastic Beasts yet? I really want to. My brother said that they cast Johnny Depp as Grindelwald. I cant wait! Also, I don't know your age, or what you were like as a kid, but Hannah Montana is back on Disney Channel for the month of December! Please pass the Hannah Montana message on to everyone. Anyone that grew up watching it as I have, should get the chance to watch it again.Fenrirgreyback02 ~This love we have will never end. We're circles we begin again. 21:12, December 4, 2016 (UTC)

Unidentified individuals in Fantastic Beasts

Could you please create pages for all the credited unidentified individuals who appeared in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (film) as well as pics of them, please? (Hobbiton777 (talk) 19:14, December 6, 2016 (UTC))

3rd Slytherin Chaser in first movie

Can you Please made photo of him? --Matthew Bowyer Fan (talk) 11:07, June 5, 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. --Matthew Bowyer Fan (talk) 10:13, June 6, 2016 (UTC)

Can you Please help me find him? --Matthew Bowyer Fan (talk) 18:32, December 11, 2016 (UTC)

hey! you havent answered me in awhile. has something come up? 

i look forward to hearing from you,

[User:Fenrirgreyback02|Fenrirgreyback02]]~This love we have will never end. We're circles we begin again. 19:32, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

Okay sorry i found it on a site that i thought was not lying thenn i found it on an image that was not linked to the sight. But i will stop i just thought it wasnt a lie cause i sw it on an image twice.Charmsking (talk) 01:47, December 22, 2016 (UTC)

This is the site i used Amino have a look and when or if you have determined please write back.Charmsking (talk) 02:05, December 22, 2016 (UTC)

We visited Chicago and came back yesterday night. My older sister is here and has to leave tomorrow. How was Fantastic Beasts? I'm assuming you have seen it. Who was your favorite character? [User:Fenrirgreyback02|Fenrirgreyback02]]~This love we have will never end. We're circles we begin again. 16:05, December 29, 2016 (UTC)

RE:FB Cases images

Yes, it's mostly because they're .png, so they ultimately look better even if they are of somewhat lower resolution. I don't have that many screenshots from Cases (mainly because taking screenshots on my tablet is a royal pain), especially of the blink-and-you-miss-it glimpses of the clues that you mend/clean-up/etc., so be my guest! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 03:05, December 30, 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Just wishing you a Happy New Year in advance. :) Starstuff (Owl me!) 05:01, December 31, 2016 (UTC)

The page function for {{CB}} doesn't seem to be working. Can you give it a look when you've the time? Thanks! Starstuff (Owl me!) 06:35, December 31, 2016 (UTC)
Good work on the Chocolate Frog Card revision so far. I hate to put more work on you after you've already gotten started, but could you alphabetize the character entries by surname? I might go in and do this myself when I have a bit more time. Starstuff (Owl me!) 03:51, January 2, 2017 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, I do see now that that was kind of pointless. Would you like me to go back and fix it or are you okay? Lasso, do you have any ideas to help my edit count as I cannot see anything to correct or add. Once again, sorry for putting in pointless information. Thank you, Harrypotterfreak233 (talk) 18:54, January 2, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Physical Descriptors

As far as I was aware, if the book doesn't say something, we will in with the film information, yes? Well, we know Lavender's description from the books, but we do not know any of Astoria's stuff due to her not appearing. So, per the tiers of canon that this wiki works on, we have to use the appearance of her from the film; brown hair and eyes, pale skin. There is no other possible information that was can use. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 03:33, January 6, 2017 (UTC)

Very well. I'll go and yell at Seth later; it's 04:32am here now!--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 04:33, January 6, 2017 (UTC)

Ron

Hope you don't mind, but I added another reference to Ron's skin colour. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 21:01, January 6, 2017 (UTC)

Serephina

Because I don't know how, I thought I'd tell you here. References 4 and 5 are the same. Can they be merged? --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 19:05, January 8, 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to meddle again... but 1 and 2 are the same too. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 19:10, January 8, 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Seems, today at least, that I can't do anything right. I shouldn't've bothered you. Never mind. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 19:15, January 8, 2017 (UTC)

Quidditch Chocolate Frog Card

Hello!

Primarily, sorry for my poor English.

I noticed that you were trying to re-organize national Quidditch teams articles because of Chocolate Frog Cards in HP6 DS/PSP. I just want warn you that some names and tiltes are different from Harry Potter: Quidditch World Cup. For exemple, worst is Japanese team cards : the card Tamotsu Iwamoto shows in fact Ryotaro Tanaka, Ryotaro Tanaka's card shows Noriyuki Sato, Noriyuki Sato's card shows Keiko Takahashi and Keiko Takahashi's card shows Tamotsu Iwamoto. You can heard/see right names/characters in the Quidditch World Cup video game.
Shinra (parlotage) 21:33, January 8, 2017 (UTC)

Sadly, as you know, the names in this game can be only heard. If it can help you, I've already checked some teams for the French Wiki, the American and Nordic teams cards are right, but those of the Australian team seems to have some mistakes.
Shinra (parlotage) 14:20, January 9, 2017 (UTC)
I played with the Australian team, and there's also some mistakes :
Name according to
Half-Blood Prince
Image Name according to
QWC
Matthew Echunga
Matthew Echunga - card HBP-NDS
Kenneth Hastings
Kenneth Hastings
Kenneth Hastings - card HBP-NDS
Matthew Echunga
Lucy Karoonda
Lucy Karoonda - card HBP-NDS
Kelly Whakkaarangapawarau
Kelly Whakkaarangapawarau
Kelly Whakkaarangapawarau - card HBP-NDS
Lucy Karoonda
There's also something I wanted to ask you, do you know the name of the Australian Team Special Move ? I know it's "Déferlante de Farcing" in French ("Farcing's Surging" ? "Surging of Farcing" ?), but impossible to find the original name on the Web...
Shinra (parlotage) 15:01, January 15, 2017 (UTC)
Hi, sorry for replying to bring up a somewhat old conversation, but was this situation ever resolved? I don't know about other teams, but due to the 2014 Quidditch World Cup, I'm rather a big fan of the Japanese National Quidditch team, but I realized almost half of the players of the 1994 roster are messed up. It's quite disturbing that Keiko Takahashi used the incorrectly credited image, that changed her gender; the image is Tamotsu Iwamoto, and her actual appearance according to Harry Potter: Quidditch World Cup is Noriyuki Sato - card HBP-NDS, which is incorrectly credited as Noriyuki Sato, a dude. The only people the Chocolate Frog Card got right from the team seemed to be Minaka Hirakata, Yoshihiro Suzuki and Shizuka Watanabe, which doesn't sound too bad, but the rest weren't like "swap with another", but just mixed up. Not sure how to fix it, especially because when I was tempted to swap Keiko's infobox image, the file name is clearly another person, which could be misleading and looking like an error if using. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 06:35, October 19, 2018 (UTC)
(P.S. I didn't realize the Japanese team was actually the first to be warned for by Shinra, lol only payed attention to the ones with images.)--Sammm✦✧(talk) 06:41, October 19, 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I did wonder if the timing of the release of the "incorrect" one was the reason why there was a dilemma. I could be wrong, but I think there might still be a possibility to resolve this? I said "might", because unfortunately I don't have the resource to check it myself, so the following are assumptions that hopefully could be proven or disproven by people who do have ways to check. It looks like for HBP NDS, the actual wrong thing is certain images themselves; the card description matches the names. Just by going with HBP NDS itself:
  • Noriyuki Sato (M) Noriyuki Sato - card HBP-NDS (image of a female)
  • Keiko Takahashi (F) Keiko Takahashi - card HBP-NDS (image of a male)
Should technically be proof enough that something isn't right, instead of banking on the absurd scenario that they both happen to be transgender or androgynous-looking (I'm not saying this is what's happening, but I can foresee someone using this as a valid argument; I'm not denying this is a possibility, just that, it really is rather farfetched.)
There's also the fact that the names matched the gender the game itself provides: Noriyuki is a guy's name and Keiko's a girl's. The images are the ones not matching. (again, I'm aware there's the extremely unlikely scenario that both of their parents gave them names of the other gender.)
If looking at the cards by number and not in alphabetical order of their last names, it'd be like this:
The Japanese World Cup Quidditch team
Tamotsu Iwamoto Tamotsu Iwamoto (M)

Keeper
The Japanese World Cup Quidditch Team

Card 28
Tamotsu Iwamoto - card HBP-NDS
Yoshihiro Suzuki Yoshihiro Suzuki (M)

Chaser
The Japanese World Cup Quidditch Team

Card 29
Yoshihiro Suzuki - card HBP-NDS
Minaka Hirakata Minaka Hirakata (F)

Beater
The Japanese World Cup Quidditch Team

Card 30
Minaka Hirakata - card HBP-NDS
Shizuka Watanabe Shizuka Watanabe (F)

Seeker
The Japanese World Cup Quidditch Team

Card 31
Shizuka Watanabe - card HBP-NDS
Ryotaro Tanaka Ryotaro Tanaka (Captain) (M)

Chaser
The Japanese World Cup Quidditch Team

Card 32
Ryotaro Tanaka - card HBP-NDS
Noriyuki Sato Noriyuki Sato (M)

Chaser
The Japanese World Cup Quidditch Team

Card 33
Noriyuki Sato - card HBP-NDS
Keiko Takahashi Keiko Takahashi (F)

Beater
The Japanese World Cup Quidditch Team

Card 34
Keiko Takahashi - card HBP-NDS
When it's just words it's a bit hard to see, but sans the correct ones (cards #29-31), the mix-up actually isn't exactly random; the images are all just 1 card away from being correct. As in, with diagram:
The Japanese World Cup Quidditch team
Tamotsu Iwamoto Card 28
Tamotsu Iwamoto - card HBP-NDS





Card 29
Card 30
Card 31
Ryotaro Tanaka Card 32
Ryotaro Tanaka - card HBP-NDS























Noriyuki Sato Card 33
Noriyuki Sato - card HBP-NDS
Keiko Takahashi Card 34
Keiko Takahashi - card HBP-NDS
I feel like I'm very likely committing some fallacies, something about not assuming one is more right than the other ;/, but I feel that, the fact that I can identify the pattern of how it was messed up (so close! Just off by 1 card number!) should count as something.
I also think one important key is whether or not the physical appearance, the player position, and the name of the character on the Tamotsu Iwamoto article is all availably provided by QWC; that we know that "Tamotsu Iwamoto" is a Keeper (shown actually playing as one?) That'd be at least something... That card#28, while getting the gender right, he just wasn't the dude who played as a Keeper, as per what the card described.
And... I'm afraid I just took up a lot of space yet all not concrete enough to change anything, which I won't be upset over because I do kind of understand the whole basis of "when contradicting, the latest is right" thing; I can only asked if this compromise can be considered: Finding a screenshot of Keiko in QWC an use that as her infobox image. I'm aware there's the whole selecting the "most recent" thing; however there's another one about "higher quality", also, the "most recent" one is a picture of a card of the person, not a picture of the actual person. Keiko's page won't be the only one like this if going forward, for Ryotaro Tanaka, Noriyuki Sato, and Tamotsu Iwamoto are all in that situation where the infoboxes used the images that's not matching the later material. I'm asking permission for the changes for Keiko because at this point her article is the only one that's having a picture of another person of another gender. Hope it can be considered.
Sorry for taking up your time lol. You probably already know all about this, but I think it needs to be addressed somewhere in the BTS so other people can be aware of it... If it already has been, I haven't seen it that's why I went through all that analysis xP. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 20:06, October 19, 2018 (UTC)
Hello everyone. Since I am completing and creating the lists of quidditch players in the Spanish wikia, I am trying to publish as much accurate information as I can. I bumped into with this case and I would like to give some arguments to consider that the card's names from HBP are mistakes, or at least they should not be considered canon.
First of all, we should consider that the first game, Quidditch World Cup (QWC), is a game with players created from Roling's mind (or at least that is what I think, since at that time she could have contribute with at least some names or descriptions), and the cards from Half-Blood Prince (HBP) are just like a "copy and paste" from QWC, as happened in other games such as "Chamber of Secrets" and "Prisoner of Azkaban" have their cards from "Philosopher's Stone".
Secondly, if there had been an error in QWC, i.e.: that in this game some names were wrong and so they will be corrected in HBP, then in HBP would have clarified it explicitly in other canon sources, such as Pottermore, that these names are correct in the 6th videogame.
Thirdly, in order to avoid more problems and not to confuse the readers, I personally think that we should take the information given by QWC because it is more complete. I found this video in high quality in order to demonstrate the name of the chaser being uttered by Ludo Bagman. In addition, I took this and this picture showing the chasers that were uttered by the commentarist, just to support my point of view.
To conclude, I believe that we should only take QWC as the correct information, just to avoid more confusions. This game has more reliable data and it is high time to end this discussion. Other wikias such as the French and The Polish take QWC information as correct, and at least so do I in the Spanish wiki. After all this time, how is your posture in this talk?--25px LeFences Pukwudgie ClearBG 2 Lechucería 04:18, December 21, 2019 (UTC)

Aliases & random deletes

How about just fixing the changes instead of deleting them? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HasanHadzic006 (talkcontribs).

Re Malfoys = Slytherins

We can take it literally; it'd be something Draco would know and be proud of an, as we saw, boast about. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 18:32, January 9, 2017 (UTC)

Alright

I'm still learning the ropes at editing so I'll stumble a bit, thanks.--BlueKraid (talk) 19:42, January 10, 2017 (UTC)

Ollivander

Can you see the latest thing on the talk page? Cheers!--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 23:50, January 11, 2017 (UTC)

Question

Would it be possible to use your bot to replace instances of Category:Patronus Forms with Category:Patronus forms? The former is currently what's in use, but the capitalization is unnecessary, and inconsistent with existing categories. I'd normally just manually change instances if there were like 30 or so articles in the category, but there's over a hundred. X_X Starstuff (Owl me!) 01:39, January 17, 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Can I also ask if it would be possible to get a higher-quality scan of File:AlbaniaMap.jpg? Not right now, obviously, but whenever you've got the chance. Issues related to the Macedonia naming dispute have popped up a couple of times on this wiki in the last couple of months. I think a higher-quality scan would more firmly establish that "Macedonia" is how the country has been referred to in a canon source. Starstuff (Owl me!) 02:13, January 17, 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for moving everything. I don't think there's an issue. There were 121 pages listed in Category:Patronus Forms, and now there's 121 pages in Category:Patronus forms. So it looks like everything has been converted successfully. Starstuff (Owl me!) 02:36, January 17, 2017 (UTC)
Re:AlbaniaMap.jpg - It isn't in Film Wizardy, Page to Screen, or The Artifact Vault, as far as I can tell. Starstuff (Owl me!) 02:59, January 17, 2017 (UTC)

QWC - Australian / German Team

My bad, I confused them, Echunga is indeed the younger. I'll check twice in the future.

Unfortunately, Special Moves' names aren't listed and can be only heard when you do them - and it seems that some names are rarely said (like for the German or the Australian team).

By the way, I've also check the German team (this time, I'm pretty sure it's correct) :

German National Quidditch team 2





Shinra (parlotage) 21:25, January 18, 2017 (UTC)

Hey

In response to your question, I'm looking. I didn't add the original reference to it in, just the one for the 1953 d.o.b, because Sirius says the "Lestranges" were at Hogwarts with Snape and the group. This is either both brothers or Sirius, as he's talking about his married cousin at the time, I believe, means Bella and Rod. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 01:55, February 3, 2017 (UTC)

Hey2

I know it's a little too late asking this, should I keep the Magical Congress of the United States of America departments cat page? I saw that there was a cat for the Ministry departments and separate cats for each department, so I figured I'd add it, but wanted to check in you to see if I should keep adding the cat to the MACUSA department pages or have it deleted. Andrewh7 (talk) 21:27, February 22, 2017 (UTC) Andrewh7

Errol Hawkworth

We can assume that children have the same surname as their father unless there's some evidence to suggest otherwise (e.g., the parents are conclusively known not to have been married, or they gave their children hyphenated surnames like we now know that Ron and Hermione did).

As for Emmett, unless he's explicitly identified in the game's text as Errol Hawkworth's father, it's possible that he was Ernest's maternal grandfather, and thus not a Hawkworth. In which case we'd just have the article on him located at Emmett. Starstuff (Owl me!) 19:19, March 8, 2017 (UTC)

Currently, Fantastic Beasts: Cases from the Wizarding World is handled under Template:FB, but I'm thinking it would be best to spin it off into its own appearance template, since the game has little to do with the film. Template:FBC? Starstuff (Owl me!) 20:29, March 8, 2017 (UTC)
A user made has made a complete muck of the birth categorization system, adding Category:20th century births to the articles of characters whose specific year, or at least decade, of birth is known. This, of course, is redundant and has made a mess of the century categories, which are reserved for characters whose century of birth, but not specific decade or year, is known. I could really use some help going through this and trying to put things back in order if you've got the time. Starstuff (Owl me!) 09:52, March 9, 2017 (UTC)
I manually cleaned up the "20th century births" category. Some of the other birth categories might need to be cleaned up, though, and it's looking like the Category:Individuals by year of Sorting and Category:Individuals by year of death and their children will need to be seen to as well.
I can't think of an instance where both higher- and lower-level birth/death/sorting categories (e.g. "Category:20th century births" and "Category:1970s births") would need to be included in an article. If we're able to pinpoint a specific character's birth to the late 1970s based on new information, for instance, then there's no longer a need to list them under "Category:20ths century births." That category is for when we only have enough info to pin a birth down to a specific century. Or where when a character was born at the turn of a decade and we can't pinpoint on which side they fall. Like many of the students in Harry's year. We don't know if Lavender Brown was born in 1979 or 1980, and it wouldn't be appropriate to categorize her under both "Category:1970s births" and "Category:1980s births," since someone cannot have been born in two decades (excepting, perhaps, the very rare baby born at 12AM on New Year's Day, which I doubt applies to Lavender). So she has to default to "20th century births," even though her birth falls in one of two specific years.
Nationality categories are a bit more complicated. It's possible for two child categories to apply to a character in the case of emigration (e.g., "Category:French individuals" and "Category:English individuals" for Fleur Delacour, who moved to England from France upon marriage).
I'd love to be able to delegate the job of removing redundant categories to a bot. My only concern is that the bot wouldn't be able to discern where to place a category within the alphabetic ordering used for to organize categories, and would just slap it onto the end like a lot of new editors do. Starstuff (Owl me!) 20:33, March 9, 2017 (UTC)
Would you be able to use your bot powers to change instances of Category:Second War casualties to Category:Second Wizarding War casualties? Thanks! Starstuff (Owl me!) 01:39, March 10, 2017 (UTC)
Thanks again! :) Starstuff (Owl me!) 03:02, March 10, 2017 (UTC)
I proposed cleaning up Category:Creatures a while back. I do think it could benefit from an effort to reduce redundancy, but, at the same time, I think there's a benefit to cross-listing articles in both parent and child cats that might not apply elsewhere. The Ministry of Magic divisions categories (Category:Beasts, Category:Beings, Category:Spirits) seem speculative in a lot of cases, i.e. we don't have official canon confirmation that certain creatures fall under certain categories, we're inferring their classifications based on their similarity or dissimilarity to known beasts, beings, and spirits. Thus I think it would be impossible to to completely empty the top-tier level Category:Creatures into the MoM division cats.
Might be better to try to impose an organization scheme similar to Category:Individuals, where there's various thematic container sub-categories. Like "Creatures by classification", "Creatures by species," "Creatures by range," etc. Starstuff (Owl me!) 07:10, March 10, 2017 (UTC)

BeccaMalfoy

My personal suggestion? Block her immediately. On the Harry Potter Fanon Wiki -- of which I am part of -- she had taken to stealing characters made by other editors (including mine!) and fitting her own characters around hers. We did ask her to stop, but in the end we had to get an admin to block her from editing to protect our pages. Just my two cents. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 22:00, March 26, 2017 (UTC)

Hulleywood

Just thought I'd inform you that Hulleywood has vandalized multiple wikis and has been infinite banned on them. You might consider doing the same here, or informing VSTF. Zane T 69 (talk) 03:01, April 7, 2017 (UTC)

How do you become an admin on this wiki? I noticed that you do a lot of high-quality work here, thanks for that by the way, and the wiki has a major shortage of people who can guard the wiki against the threats. At least from what I have seen, anyway. Zane T 69 (talk) 03:16, April 7, 2017 (UTC)

Official Magical Secrets Act?

Hello, there. :-)

I recently lent my edition of the updated version of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them to a friend of mine, and thus can't check it myself, so I wondered if you got it too? If so, would you care to check wether I am remembering this correctly? Didn't Newt Scamander mention something along the line of an 'official magical secrets act', a law set down by the British Ministry of Magic forbidding those under their jurisdiction who was present in certain historically significant incidents from telling people about it as long as the files was classified? Ninclow (talk) 17:53, April 12, 2017 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick!  Good job! :-D 

Thanks. Hope we can continue to cooperate on maintaining the wikia like this without arguing all the time. ^^' Ninclow (talk) 21:20, April 12, 2017 (UTC)

Oh... Epic fail? ^^'

Well, even if we don't always see eye to eye, I honestly do think your dedication to accuracy and so fort makes you a valuable resource for the wikia. So thumbs up anyway! :-D Ninclow (talk) 11:43, April 13, 2017 (UTC)

Gellert Grindelwald main image

Can't the main picture in Gellert Grindelwald's page be changed to a batter version of it? This is too old. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WaltDisneyIII (talkcontribs).

Movie vs Movie script: 

Hi, just wondered if I could pick your brain about this thing I'm pondering on. Any thoughts? Ninclow (talk) 22:31, April 19, 2017 (UTC)

Good point, I should have thought about that. :-)

Re: Fidelius Charm - UK vs US

Hey! I checked both the UK eBook and the hardcover edition and they both say complex as well so I'm not sure where challenging came from :) -- Kates39 (talk) 20:11, April 21, 2017 (UTC)


Re: Admin assistance

Yeah, no prob. That's what we're here for, right? Given him a warning; if he does it again, a block will be enforced. --Cubs Fan (Talk to me) 02:05, April 22, 2017 (UTC)

Chat

Hello, there! Do you think you can join me on chat for a moment? Thanks! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 19:01, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

Re: British expulsion

No problem! 

The UK government has the same approach as the American one. There are two kinds of exclusion / expulsion - fixed period meaning suspension and permanent meaning expelled. There are schools who have their own approach though. This link might help you. -- Kates39 (talk) 19:26, April 24, 2017 (UTC)

RE:Family categories

You know, I really don't know how to answer that. I would say, at a first glance, that listing just that characters' surnames seems to be the cleanest, most straightforward option — genealogical relationships could be given just on the family category page? (i.e. the "Potter family" page being under the "Peverell family" category? Though I can see this becoming a mess quite easily -- should Weasley be under Potter or Potter under Weasley?) This perhaps needs more thorough discussion; would you be willing to create a forum on this? --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 09:40, April 26, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Professor vs Teacher

I was removing all references of them being called professors from the page. I suppose their jobs could be said to be professors at Hogwarts, but given that they weren't called professors I changed it to teacher. -- Saxon 14:16, April 26, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Undo marathon

Thanks! - I am getting a bit tired of hitting the undo button today. Hopefully the problem will be sorted soon and we can get back to normal editing! -- Kates39 (talk) 23:03, April 30, 2017 (UTC)

No problem! I have to go now, but they appear to have given up for the time being. Hopefully an admin can intervene soon. -- Kates39 (talk) 11:23, May 10, 2017 (UTC)

Can you?

Can you see my comment on the talk page of "Pure-blood: round 2"? Thanks!--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 02:09, May 6, 2017 (UTC)

Trivia - Behind the Scenes

Looking through the articles, I've noticed that some articles use Trivia sections. Is there any difference between a Trivia and a BTS section? If not, could we get permission to use your bot to rename all Trivia sections to BTS?--Rodolphus (talk) 18:14, May 6, 2017 (UTC)

RE: Rappapart's Law

True, it does not mention Muggleborns, but it's implied as all contact with Muggles is forbidden except for what they have to do to get on with their daily lived... and by marrying a Muggleborn, they're coming into contact with Muggles, which is forbidden, implying it's both that count. As for the ancestry, that backs up my point -- if Muggleborn are included, then at least one of Tina's ancestors has to, pre 1793, have become half-blood, meaning the ancestry is distant.--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 03:01, May 9, 2017 (UTC)

Re: UK spelling check

Hi, no problem! Yes, it says "moonlight filters". -- Kates39 (talk) 19:30, May 9, 2017 (UTC)

switching to location as always stated as such

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Sorry, that was not really a mocking laugh as an amused one. Kind of like CinemaSins? - Because... 

  1. YOU being the one to undo my edit is not exactly surprising.
  2. The reason for removing actual canonically confirmed information doesn't even make sense. Ninclow (talk) 07:29, May 10, 2017 (UTC)

Oh... Sorry, that was a bit pressumptious of me... :/ Ninclow (talk) 11:41, May 10, 2017 (UTC)

RE:"Inferi" articles

Oh, that's ok, I figured out as much. I meant to contact you about it the other day, but never got round to it. In the meantime -- as I am no Dumbledore -- I'll get a box of matches. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 17:34, May 11, 2017 (UTC)

Section header

Just curious; why did you undo my edit? The way it's published now, it makes it look like Quidditch is no longer played, since it's written about in the past tense.TennesseeTimeLord (talk) 15:55, May 12, 2017 (UTC)TennesseeTimeLord

Fleamont family

Hey. Could I ask for your thoughts on the blood status of the Fleamont family? You have a better understanding of blood status than I do at the moment! Henry Potter's mother is currently listed as pure-blood. The reference states she must be as her son, grandson and great-grandson are but in light of your sources, only James can be confirmed as pure-blood.

Judging by the no muggle / muggle-born grandparent rule, Henry could be half-blood. Therefore, so could his mother and her family. Have I got that right? -- Kates39 (talk) 22:45, May 12, 2017 (UTC)

Can you fix it?

While you are, right now, the last person I want to talk too and I am currently loathing every single thing about every micro-atom of your body, Seth seems to have vanished, so cannot fix it. I have added some references to Pandora Lovegood's page; as they're the same reference they need to go under a named ref, which I can never seem to get right. Can you put them under one? --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 00:56, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

I know that you know, but...

Are you okay, mate? I know I can get worked up and be a bit... Less embracing than I could be when that happens, but HarryPotterRules1 stepped out of line with that last comment. I'm sure you're just going to lift your head high and ignore it, but just wanted to ask, because no one should be accused of something like "screwing up the entire wikia" lest they're some troll who actually tries doing that or something. :/ Ninclow (talk) 01:17, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

Great! :-D Ninclow (talk) 01:27, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

BTW, may I congratulate you with having a exceedingly wise uncle and a most realistic view on British wizard-Muggle relations? Ever considered a job in Muggle Relations? :P Ninclow (talk) 01:39, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

Uh?

You do know that was my page you posted on, not Seth's right? --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 01:40, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

I am as elegant as an elephant in a glass store...

Mind helping me with this this? Merlin, I'm useless. Ninclow (talk) 12:50, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

What's your conclusion? :-) Ninclow (talk) 17:03, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

Was that a question about whether we should be categorized by nationality or what I meant by American criminals? Ninclow (talk) 20:11, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

Never mind, I re-red it. :p

Yeah, I figured it'd be more organized and stuff if criminals were sorted into the nationalities from which they hailed. Ninclow (talk) 20:21, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

RE:Full Black Family tapestry

Not that I know of, I'm afraid! (and I never got to go to Leavesden! Last I was in London I went specifically to watch Cursed Child, so I only was there for the weekend, so I was rather limited on my sightseeing!) --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 16:01, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

That's right! One thing I did stumble upon there was a tapestry at Victoria and Albert Museum from which they had clearly based some of the likenesses in the Black family tapestry prop (and I had never read about it, anywhere!) Imagine how surprised I was to look at a mid-fifteenth century Flemish tapestry and find Walburga Black staring back at me! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 16:17, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

Hogwarts Library 2017

Hello.... Unfortunately I do not have the ebooks, well I wanted ... It is very difficult to find ebooks now, especially in Brazil. I found the images on the internet and on the website of ebooks illustrator "Tomislav Tomic". --JoaoRavenclaw07 (talk) 01:22, May 14, 2017 (UTC)

Hogwarts Library 2017

I do not know how to do this, my English not so good and I'm kind of lost with so much information ..... To have an idea I'm translating and writing all these messages in Google Translator .... ops!!! Kkkkkkk But thanks for speaking this, I will look at the next time I put images and I'm sorry for my poor English.JoaoRavenclaw07 (talk) 01:34, May 14, 2017 (UTC)


Thank you for your help! I'll try next time. Obrigado! (Means "thank you" in Portuguese)JoaoRavenclaw07 (talk) 03:19, May 14, 2017 (UTC)

Potter

Sorry, but it was kinda wrong to me for you to add a Fleamont Potter  sub-heading on the Potter family page! Tvurta (talk) 08:44 May 20, 2017 (UTC)

On the Images page, there are over several pictures of Credence that are the same and there is no need for more than one. Could you or have someone remove them? Tremewitch127 (talk) 18:51, May 22, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

In dept page

I understand your reasons for adding additional information to pages. I won't delete it again, but I am going to clean it up. Misskatniss1546 (talk) 20:05, May 24, 2017 (UTC)Misskatniss1546

School years

Could you stop deleting the information on Harry's first and second years! It's annoying me! Tvurta (talk) 3:22, May 26, 2017

Quidditch and school years

As you are currently working on the school year articles, perhaps you could also help me working on the articles on individual Quidditch matches I started creating a while ago? Its a bit hard for me, as I only have the audiobooks and don't have most Englisgh versions. I only created articles on the Gryffindor vs. Slytherin Quidditch match (1991) and the Gryffindor vs Ravenclaw Quidditch match. (1992) The infobox still has not been created as of now. Also, you have done good work on the school year articles! I wonder if there is enough information to create articles on earlier or later school years.--Rodolphus (talk) 18:04, May 26, 2017 (UTC)

Merlin's Beard

Merlin1 Merlin's Beard!
Ten-thousand edits on the Harry Potter Wiki makes this user a
POTTER FANATIC!

I've yet seen you should have gotten it a long time before. Now you get it. Congrats!  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 21:25, May 26, 2017 (UTC)

OOTP Film

Hey. I was wondering what the policy is for removing things on talk pages? This user is making a very lengthy recap of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix on the talk page of the film. There is some fanon within it as well. Since the talk page is not meant for that, would it be okay for me to just remove it? Thanks. -- Kates39 (talk) 20:17, June 2, 2017 (UTC)

articles?

Can you help me creating seperate articles on newspaper articles? We have a separate category and infobox, but not many individual articles yet.--Rodolphus (talk) 15:49, June 3, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Moving timetables

Great! I have made my way through the first few books. Do you know where the reference for Norberta's birthday of 24 April is from? I might be able to pinpoint a day of the week, but using the real world calendar places that on Friday. Norberta was hatched the same day Harry, Ron and Hermione skipped Herbology. However, it cannot be Friday as we know they only have double Potions and then the afternoon off. There is no reference for the date on Norberta's page.

I was wondering what your thoughts were on using real world calendars to find dates overall. It can be helpful, but sometimes Rowling gets the days of the week mixed up. Should we use real world calendars when it does not contradict anything else in the book? -- Kates39 (talk) 16:25, June 4, 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, that was my main worry when using real world calendars in the same way the HP Lexicon did - it won't always work out! We should probably stick to the days of the week given, and work around them. Unfortunately, the second CoS DVD with the extras is the only one I don't have. Hopefully we can find someone else to help out with that one, and I will have a look online in the meantime. - Kates39 (talk) 19:13, June 4, 2017 (UTC)
Good luck! I would love to have a look if you manage you upload it onto youtube. -- Kates39 (talk) 10:00, June 5, 2017 (UTC)
I have updated and added references to the timetable on the 1992–1993 school year page. A lot of what was in them were errors or guesswork based on the real world calendar which as usual, didn't match up with the book's timeline! I put everything we can determine for certain in the actual timetable, as the book gives an actual day for them, but moved/put everything we don't know under a new heading called "Notes". -- Kates39 (talk) 19:06, June 5, 2017 (UTC)
Looks great - thanks for doing that! You have picked up most of the mistakes, but I have noticed a few more. For example, they have 31 October 1981 as the date Harry arrived at Privet Drive, but he arrived on 1 November. They also have the 3 September as the date of Lockhart's lesson on Cornish pixies, but it happened the first day back at Hogwarts on 2 September. I look forward to seeing the other ones if you have the time, but no worries if you can't! -- Kates39 (talk) 18:03, June 10, 2017 (UTC)

Questions

For the Ilvermorny page, could some of the unnamed Native American students be added to the list or because they're unnamed they can't? Also, hypothetically if my first account was blocked, but I proved I created the second one after the block, could he still block the second one? Tremewitch127 (talk) 19:35, June 25, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Oh yeah I made a typo before; I said second one after the block, I meant before. Also, I was wondering if you knew how I might say it on the Ilvermorny page?  Should I start off with unnamed or just say Wampanog/Narangassett and whatever after that? Tremewitch127 (talk) 03:47, June 26, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Wouldn't Gregory Goyle's mother be a pure-blood considering a pure-blood and a half-blood makes a half-blood like Delphini and if Goyle's mother was a half-blood, so would be? Tremewitch127 (talk) 14:44, June 28, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

I removed the references because I feel they weren't needed, imo most of the ones that did have references were either already stated in the movies or they just weren't needed. Tremewitch127 (talk) 18:02, July 6, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Okay, but are they/most of them really necessary? Also are Tina and Queenie's parents Americans seeing as how Tina and Queenie both went to Ilvermorny? Tremewitch127 (talk) 19:02, July 6, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch12

Wouldn't Draco and Delphini be blood relatives of the House of Black seeing as how both of their mothers are blood relatives of the HOB? Also, why should I not blank a page that's just going to gen deleted anyways? Why should I also let others review the page when it's fanon and it's complete nonsense? Tremewitch127 (talk) 18:42, July 7, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

I want to add that Ilvermorny was mentioned in one or two of the articles of Ilvermorny; not that they were mentioned, but was in the articles, but I don't know how to say it. Should I saw in the New York Ghost or just go straight to it? Also, on the Potter family page, should I say that the American branch is loyal/affiliated with MACUSA (in the infobox)? Tremewitch127 (talk) 05:31, July 12, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Could I add a description of the castle on the Ilvermorny Castle page kinda like the description of the Hogwarts Castle, but shorter? Is there a rule about no gifs on the wiki? I found an image of the duel between Isolt Sayre and the boys vs. Gormlaith, could I add it to the Ilvermorny Castle page despite it not being the castle yet? Tremewitch127 (talk) 19:17, September 2, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Could J. Ward and the others from the Rat memo have second floor sorcery staff put on their pages?  The memo was for the staff and directed to them.  Tremewitch127 (talk) 00:35, September 8, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Is the edict that made Thunderbirds and the North American magical beasts named the Protective Order on Thunderbirds or just what they called it? Tremewitch127 (talk) 06:13, September 24, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

I want to add a page for the duel between the Boot Boys and Isolt vs. Gormlaith, but don't know how to name it. Do I have one page for the Boot boys vs. Gormlaith and another one for the one with Isolt and her aunt? Tremewitch127 (talk) 20:20, October 29, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

When adding images of the individual articles and ads in the New York Ghost, how do you make it bigger/much more closer and clearer than in the movie? I tried and only got a really small image unlike the others. Tremewitch127 (talk) 22:12, November 3, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

What about the ads though because some of them like the Man-Hat-On Milliners for Wizards ad is really clear and the ad is barely shown, or shown to fast, in the movie? Tremewitch127 (talk) 08:22, November 7, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Quick question, wouldn't the Death Eaters unsupported flight not be considered Apparition? I mean they have been shown to be able to fly unsupported and that certainly looks like it. I mean they aren't apparating like the Golden Trio/Dumbledore and Newt did, they appear to be flying using black smoke. I noticed that the Wand Collection book doesn't appear to be on this wiki and was curious as to why. Tremewitch127 (talk) 19:37, November 23, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Since it was never actually stated to be Apparition, can the images of the black/white smoke flying be removed from the Images of Apparition category page? I mean if it was never stated to actually be Apparition, it can't exactly be considered Apparition.  Some of the Unsupported Flight images also show black smoke.

Could the Wizards category page be split into two separate category pages: one for wizards and another for witches so it isn't so extremely long? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 07:19, January 17, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Re:Dragon eggs

It's in the first case, when you find the nest in the bell tower. Mathilda comments something like "at least we know it's not a dragon". But, yes, an image reference for that statement would be useful; I wasn't thinking of it at the time. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 21:02, July 13, 2017 (UTC)

Chat

Hey, are you available for chat? Starstuff (Owl me!) 00:15, August 23, 2017 (UTC)

Has this issue become unmanageable? Starstuff (Owl me!) 01:10, August 25, 2017 (UTC)

Creature categories

One issue I noticed with the bot cleanup is that it's sometimes leaving a sub-sub-category as the only category on an article. For example, the bot has removed Category:Creatures from a number of animal articles, leaving only Category:Patronus forms, as the Category:Patronus forms is sub-sub-category of Category:Creatures. This means that a number of creature articles are now effectively buried in an obscure corner: Category:Creatures -> Category:Creatures by trait - > Category:Patronus forms. I think the solution here is to create a number of categories for creature types (reptiles, birds, whales, etc.) and then add those to creature articles, so that they'll be more readily accessible from the top-level Category:Creatures. Starstuff (Owl me!) 22:20, August 24, 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, there definitely needs to be exceptions to the bot's category-pruning parameters. It's a useful tool, but sometimes what's needed is not the efficiency of a hammer, but the precision of a scalpel.
I definitely think there needs to be exceptions for actors and Hogwarts students. Having them all applicable articles listed in the root category is useful, because someone may remember part of an actor's name, without remembering specifically in what movie(s) that actor has appeared. So being able to browse through lists of every known Potter actor and Hogwarts student can be useful for readers.
I noticed some issues with Category:Humans too. Remus Lupin isn't listed in Category:Werewolves any more, I guess because the bot saw he was already in Category:Wizards. And I think it's also removed some people from the root-level too. I don't know why. I just know I've had to re-add Category:Humans to a few articles where it apparently got removed.
The issue with creatures is probably something that a bot can't fix. I think we need to work that one out manually, and I'm giving it a shot right now: something like Category:Creatures -> Category:Creatures by type -> Category:Mammals -> Category:Horses. I don't know if "Creatures by type" is a good name. A bit too close to "Creatures by classification." Maybe "Creatures by taxonomy?" But that's a bit too jargon-y. Starstuff (Owl me!) 23:37, August 24, 2017 (UTC)
Another issue I've found is that the bot seemingly disallows cross-listing a category in two subcategories of the same parent category because it's been programmed to look for "redundant" categories. There's plenty of cases where an article could legitimately fall under two categories that fall under the same parent category. I'm finding this now as I try to sort out Category:Creatures. Take Category:Vampires. The bot automatically removed Category:Beings, even though that's a valid category, and left Category:Living dead, because both are some degree of sub-category of Category:Creatures. If we try to better organize Category:Creatures, there will naturally be cases in which multiple subcategories apply to a creature article. Taxonomical categories, MoM danger classification categories, range/region categories if we decide to go there. I can also imagine the bot mucking up Category:Individuals. Because there's so many different categories, and they're all children of that one giant parent. Starstuff (Owl me!) 01:27, August 25, 2017 (UTC)
Question: is the bot constantly active or does it only operate on command? Like will it automatically scan through articles/categories for redundant additions? Because I suppose if you've already run it on Category:Creatures, and it's done it's job, it's not such a big issue. We can just smooth out the kinks mentioned above by manually re-adding categories the bot accidentally removed as redundant. Starstuff (Owl me!) 01:42, August 25, 2017 (UTC)

Rune Credit

The term "Rune credit" appears on the bank form I just made a page for that you edited. Any theories of what that might be? Ninclow (talk) 19:29, September 3, 2017 (UTC)

Skender's Circus - it is indeed Circus Arcanus

Hi. I have insider information on the circus in the upcoming film as I've recently been in correspondence with the actor Henry Douthwaite, who actually played Skender in the original film before his part was cut. Here's what I gleaned:

-Skender is Russian. -When I inquired about the enchanting snake girl, he confirmed she was there. -He said that the circus is a freak show. -He apparently influences Credence to join the circus to Europe. When Credence has a moments pause, he tells him, if he stays, "they'll kill you!"

This means that Skender's Wizarding Circus is in fact Circus Arcanus. Can we change the articles, now?

Category:Wands

Someone recently added Category:Wands to a number of character wand articles. Can you run the bot to remove this category? It's a bit too much work to do manually, I think. Can you also target it so it only removes the Wands category, but doesn't remove false-positive redundant categories? Thanks! Starstuff (Owl me!) 00:28, September 7, 2017 (UTC)

By "false-positives" I basically meant how the bot sometimes removes individually relevant categories as redundant simply because they are both nested under the same parent category. For example, I mean the bot would see Category:Poplar wands, Category:Unicorn hair wands, and Category:Wands crafted by Garrick Ollivander on the same article, and remove two of them because they're subcategories of Category:Wands. Starstuff (Owl me!) 03:35, September 8, 2017 (UTC)

Rollback

You might notice a little something different next time you edit. :) Starstuff (Owl me!) 00:47, September 7, 2017 (UTC)

Re:Please not again

Stop and rethink it? I haven't done anything else since the admins said no and brushed off my real life unhappiness as if it meant nothing.I know you don't know this or have any reason to care, because why would you possibly do, but - I am going through a depression and is these days in a rather dark, gloomy place. I really, REALLY don't need stuff like that taining my life right now. The wikia loses nothing by removing it without childlishly arguing about it. It is insesnetive, disrespectful, cavil, demoralizing, there is literary NO benefit of it being there AT ALL, and the only concivable reason for ANYONE to make a problem out of it is that they're a) such a stickler for rules that it clouds their moral judgement or 2) Enjoy seeing me misreable. Do you have ANY idea of how degrading it is to see that crap on the talk page, to know it's there, displaying on a silver plate whant an ass I can be when I lose my temper? That's the only two things I am capable of getting out from this situation. Ninclow (talk) 19:43, September 10, 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Ironyak. If you're going to be negatively affected by situations like this, then the internet is not the best place to be. Also it doesn't allow you to bend wiki policies as you please, just because you don't like them. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 10:47, September 11, 2017 (UTC)

US vs UK spelling

Just wanted to point out that just because Harry Potter was filmed and takes place in the UK and the UK spelling is still the same word as the US one doesn't mean that the spelling always has to be U.K. spelling, especially on any pages about the US or pages about people or places in the US, and that words should be changed on a page just because it's the US spelling rather than the U.K. one. Tremewitch127 (talk) 19:50, September 25, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Subcategories

Just to be sure, but if there is a cat like Wizard families and has subcats to individual wizard families, is it safe to add to the cat or should it remain a subcategory? Tremewitch127 (talk) 03:55, September 28, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Why is it that categories have be subcategories to other categories? Take the Malfoy family for instance, the Malloy family cat has to be a subcat of the Sacred Twenty-Eight families cat which is a subcategory of pure-blood families and that to Wizard families and the Malfoy family cat can't be added to the Wizard families and Sacred Twenty-Eight families cat? Tremewitch127 (talk) 21:03, September 28, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Event articles, FB...

I´m just think about something: Could we create more event articles on FB events? We already have the fund-raising dinner article.

I don't think we have any canon names, so I think we could use titles like:

  • Attempted arrest of Gellert Grindelwald near a chateau in Europe (quite long title, I know.)
  • Obscurus manifestation in New York
  • Newton Scamander's break of the International statute of Secrecy
  • First arrest of Gellert Grindelwald. (Doesn't Newt refer to himself in the foreword as the the first person to arrest him)

Unless we already have those.

I'm not experienced with writing event articles, so maybe you start them of you like. Thanks.--Rodolphus (talk) 22:04, October 2, 2017 (UTC)

I just noticed that on the MACUSA page, under Personnel section and Presidents subsection, the years can't be seen. Could you see if you can fix it as soon as you can? Tremewitch127 (talk) 03:36, October 8, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

Cirque Arcanus Confirmed

Hi! I was the one who left the message about Skender and the Wizarding Circus a while ago?

We have a new featured extra listed on IMDb who plays a "Cirque Arcanus Worker". We should probably sync up the pages at this point. Do you think we should?

Gif Images

Just to be sure, are gifs allowed on the wiki? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tremewitch127 (talkcontribs).

Re:Admins please LOCK?

Yeah, because nothing has ever been resolved through conversation before... Ninclow (talk) 23:26, October 15, 2017 (UTC)

The basilisk debate

Would you be OK with some random real life creature having completely unlimited magic in the harry potter universe?

Opdagon (talk) 18:33, October 16, 2017 (UTC)

RE: RE: The basilisk debate

So, we should use Occam's Razor, and assume that basilisks come from natural processes in the developing bird, rather than saying toads / chicken embryos are more powerful than the elder wand. Good, lets just leave the page alone once I recatergorize it.

RE:RE:RE: The basilisk debate

There is a problem in your logic, that being that a normal desk does not have the ability to transform into a pig without a wizard casting a spell. So, here is an argument ad absurdum to end the debate:



Basilisks are made with a spell. All spells must be learnt before casting.

Therefore, you must learn to make a basilisk.


Basilisk creation must be learnt. Salazar Slytherin made a basilisk.

Therefore, Salazar Slytherin learnt to make a basilisk.


Basilisk creation must be learnt. Leaders wanted to avoid basilisk creation.

Therefore, Leaders wanted to avoid basilisk creation being learnt.


Leaders wanted to avoid basilisk creation being learnt. Leaders can prevent learning things.

Therefore, basilisk creation learning was prevented.


Salazar Slytherin learnt to make a basilisk. Basilisk creation learning was prevented.

Therefore, contradiction.

Opdagon (talk) 19:11, October 17, 2017 (UTC)

Page request

Could a page be created for Isolt's and Gormlaith's duel? Tremewitch127 (talk) 19:04, October 17, 2017 (UTC) Tremewitch127

We should be more concerned about the certainty of information rather than seeking into others productiveness.

Thanks.

SeerLeviosa (talk) 16:03, October 23, 2017 (UTC) Seer Leviosa

Narcissa Malfoy - Death Eater relations?

So apparently Narcissa didn't betray the Death Eaters?

She literally lied to Voldemort saying that Harry was dead, even though he was alive. She indirectly caused the downfall of Voldemort. And you're telling me, with a straight face that she didn't betray the Death Eaters? 

Yeah, bullshit.

Aequanimus3 (talk) 16:43, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Please do not swear.
Just because Narcissa had pro-pureblood views and agreed on SOME of the Death Eater ideals does not mean she was part of the organisation. I do believe that Ironyak1 wasn't suggesting Narcissa had nothing to do with Voldemort's downfall, nor were they saying Narcissa didn't betray them. All Ironyak did was revert an edit that said Narcissa was previously a Death Eater. She wasn't, as J.K. Rowling said. Her sister Bellatrix, and husband and son Lucius and Draco were, but Narcissa herself was not.
TheTARDISLegilimens (talk) 17:57, October 26, 2017 (UTC)
Narcissa was not a Death Eater so could not defect from the group: See this interview with JKR:
Abjoppotter: Is narcissa malfoy really a death eater
J.K. Rowling: No, she never had the Dark Mark and was never a fully paid-up member. However, her views were identical to those of her husband until Voldemort planned the death of her son.
I'll owl this to the OP as well. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:55, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Do we add?

Do we add these images from Pottermore - https://www.pottermore.com/features/a-guide-to-lord-voldemorts-death-eaters - into the Death Eater articles they coincide with? Some of the images, Regulus's for example, is better than the image we actually have. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 00:00, November 1, 2017 (UTC)

So, will you be adding them? HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 02:20, November 1, 2017 (UTC)

Nevermind - I am instead. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 02:43, November 1, 2017 (UTC)

Lucius Malfoy dates

Hey! I was hoping to get your thoughts on my post added to your dicussion on Lucius Malfoy’s talk page. I spent a bit of time going through that part of the book to try and work out dates to narrow down his date of birth better and I would appreciate feedback. Thank you! —� RoseKate13 (talk) 13:29, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

Great! I just had a look at the timeline pages and I think you’ve done great work putting that together. Hopefully the OP will reply. — RoseKate13 (talk) 16:04, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

Harfang Longbottom

Please see the talk page. His name may be wrong...--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 15:48, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

Walburga Black

It's mentioned three times in the Series that "the whole Black Family were in Slytherin (once by Slughorn in DH book, once by him in the film and BY WALBURGA'S SON ON THE TRAIN TO JAMES.). Sirius WOULD know his family's houses (after all, we use the same logic for Abraxas Malfoy because of Draco saying his whole family were in Slytherin) and he was seen as being a traitor for not being in Slytherin to Walburga CANNOT HAVE BEEN ANYTHING ELSE!!!!!!!!!. So, that, to me, is enough canon information that she WAS undeniably, in Slytherin. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 16:55, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Black_Family_in_Slytherin <-- direct quote from discussion: "The issue with both of these quotes is that it is unclear whether "whole family" literally refers to every Black from Phineas Nigellus down, excepting Sirius, or just to Sirius' immediate relatives. We can conclude from Slughorn's wish to have a complete "set" that Bellatrix, Andromeda, and Narcissa were in Slytherin (although Bellatrix and Narcissa's Houses were known previously from Goblet of Fire, Ch. 27 and Chamber of Secrets, Ch. 9, respectively). Sirius' comment about "break[ing] the tradition" would seem to indicate that his father Orion and mother Walburga, at least, were in Slytherin. Broadly intepreted, the comment includes both Sirius' grandfathers and great-grandfathers, and possibly all the Blacks in Orion and Walburga's lines (i.e., those descended from Sirius II and Cygnus I)." and "We know for certain that Phineas Nigellus, Regulus, Bellatrix, Andromeda, and Narcissa were Slytherins, and I think we can reasonably say that Orion and Walburga were as well." and "From Slughorn's Pensieve memory in HBP23, we can determine he taught from at least the beginning of Tom Riddle's sixth year in 1943, and thus we know he definitely taught the following older Blacks for at least part of their time at Hogwarts: Walburga (Hogwarts years c. 1936-1943), Alphard (first year presumably 1937 to 1939, given that he was a middle child), Cygnus II (c.1940-1947), and Orion (c.1940-1947)." as posted by Starstuff (at the time, we didn't know Slughorn started teaching even earlier, but that was later revealed). Will A CONSENSUS FROM THE FORUM make you stop editing the information to make it incorrect now, SINCE THE FORUM ITSELF decided that Walburga and Orion were Slytherins? --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 17:08, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

Canon information proves you entirely and completely wrong as does the forum stuff (which I have quoted above.) --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 17:20, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

I'm done with you. I absolutely hate your entire existence right now, so I shall be stepping away from the Wiki until Seth or another admin has stepped in and dealt with it because if I keep dealing with you, I will start using bad language and say stuff I regret.
Until you're proven wrong,
Yours,
--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 17:29, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

Canon question

So would that mean the statement "the most powerful dark wizard of all time" on voldemort's pottermore page can be considered tier one canon?

Freddy1428 (talk) 21:32, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

would the quotes "the greatest dark sorcerer of all time" from book 2 chap 1 and "the most powerful dark wizard for a century" from book 2 chap 2 qualify. I've been trying find evidence that JK Rowling considers voldemort more powerful than grindelwald (which I personally consider to be true) but can't find anything totally concrete yet, while some people only consider "Voldemort most powerful" to be only british wizards opinion, what do you think?  

would the quotes "the greatest dark sorcerer of all time" from book 2 chap 1 and "the most powerful dark wizard for a century" from book 2 chap 2 qualify. I've been trying find evidence that JK Rowling considers voldemort more powerful than grindelwald (which I personally consider to be true) but can't find anything totally concrete yet, while some people only consider "Voldemort most powerful" to be only british wizards opinion, what do you think?  

Freddy1428 (talk) 22:35, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

RE:Talk template

I think it's better to judge talk pages on a case-by-case basis, since some of the "active" discussions are worthy of being kept open (case in point, Talk:Fay Dunbar#Canon, redux, which I just re-read, and that has been waiting for a major correction since -- gasp -- 2014). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 15:29, November 11, 2017 (UTC)

Re:All caps = shouting

To just assume I was shouting based on that wikipedia article would be to committ a base rate fallacy on your part. In the section in which one writes the reasons and/or comments upon the changes done to an article in the course of your edit have, at least to the best of my knowelge, no way of adding either emphasize or emphasize of text, meaning that to assume the use of caps lock, the only way left to me through which this can be accomplished, is short-sighted at best if not outright pressumptious. Now, had I used caps lock on your talk page where those tools for emphasize is available, I would be more inclined to agree with you. That being said, if this is the general interpretation, I shall keep it in mind and take it into account when I present counter-arguments in the future. Ninclow (talk) 17:32, November 21, 2017 (UTC)

The need to put emphasize in a sentence or lack thereof is completely subjective, but even if we assume it isn't, I already mentioned in my previous post that I would take heed. So what exactly are you complaining about? Ninclow (talk) 05:36, November 22, 2017 (UTC)

Amycus Carrow's wand

Thanks for your help on the Amycus Carrow's wand page. I went ahead and put a reference for the Harry Potter: The Wand Collection for the Infobox image.--Professor Ambrius (talk) 19:47, December 7, 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations on becoming an administrator! I always thought you were worthy of being an admin here! I guess you won't need the rollback user-right anymore! :D ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 23:19, December 7, 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations from me, too! (y)  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 21:19, December 8, 2017 (UTC)
Which color issue do you mean? Perhaps I can help.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 22:24, December 8, 2017 (UTC)
Ooh, a code problem. I asked my co-admin in the German Harry-Potter-Lexikon, Agent Zuri if he has an idea. He's good in such things. Let's hope the best.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 22:42, December 8, 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Ironyak, I left a message for Agent Zuri on his talk page to draw his attention to your new question. I just wanted to tell you.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 14:08, December 9, 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Agent Zuri has answered to your last question on my talk page.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 16:09, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Hey

Someone should have a nice new set of tools. 😊 Sorry to spring this on you unexpectedly. I know it's not the usual procedure, but you've proven a diligent, judicious editor, and frankly it's long overdue. The wiki needs more active hands on deck. Unfortunately, for reasons of both time and conscience, I don't foresee myself contributing in the future. Best of luck and thanks for everything you've done around here! Starstuff (Owl me!) 23:30, December 7, 2017 (UTC)


Merry Christmas to you as well! Starstuff (Owl me!) 00:03, December 8, 2017 (UTC)
I had talked with Starstuff about this some time ago, and I'm glad to see this (I blame myself mostly for having taken so long to promote you to adminship). Welcome to our over-glorified team of custodians! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:42, December 13, 2017 (UTC)

Edit war is going on

Please have a look at the history version of Veela. There we have an edit war.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 14:33, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Your answer to the code problem

Yeah, it's consistent, but nonetheless it would be have Special:CSSPages like Special:JSPages to have a proper overview. Otherwise you can't even cleanup or the like... Agent Zuri Profile Message Wall Blog 18:30, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Merge idea

Hey! I was hoping you could give your input on my idea of merging the page Twelve Christmas Trees with the page Christmas tree. I think that the subject needs only to be written about on the general page for what they are. The same information is on both, making the need for two kind of redundant. The name of the page Twelve Christmas Trees is not the given name for them in the book - they are not capitalised, they are simply just twelve trees. I looked at the rules of the wiki, and the wikia writes things as they are written in the books meaning the page is wrong already, hence the redirect to the proper page. Thank you! - RoseKate13 (talk) 18:41, December 10, 2017 (UTC)

Hey! Just bringing this back to your attention if you have the time - or not, let me know and I will forget about it! Thank you :) - RoseKate13 (talk)

My Own Words 

Okay sorry, I'll be careful next time - Galileoflat  (talk) 14:52, December 18, 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Hi, just thought I ought to pop by and congratulate you on being made an admin. I've been a bit absent the past week, the stresses of Christmas preperations and whatnot and only on the wiki very sporadically, so I didn't notice before now. So... Kudos, Ironyak1! :-D

Also, btw, do you happen to know what candy Harry and the other Griffyndors eat in the third movie that allows them to mimic animal sounds? Ninclow (talk) 04:41, December 19, 2017 (UTC)

Hey! I know I'm late to say this (real life took over and I couldn't spare time to edit unfortunately), but better late than never! congratulations on becoming an admin, you deserve it after years of great work on the wikia. - Kates39 (talk) 20:58, January 5, 2018 (UTC)

congratulations

congratulations on becoming an admin.

Freddy1428 (talk) 16:14, January 1, 2018 (UTC)

grindelwald

hi ironyak I was wondering if it would be ok to edit the grindelwald page to say one of the most dangerous dark wizards of all time. Ninclow insists that only british wizards call voldemort the most dangerous and that foreign wizards would have a different opinion but no such characters have appeared to confirm this theory, please let me know.

Freddy1428 (talk) 20:26, January 1, 2018 (UTC)

Your undo of my edit of the Newton Scammander page was uncalled for, as your reasoning is that he is a book character. Newt is not, and has never been, a character discussed in one of Rowlings novels. The book 'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them', focuses on the beasts he documented, and not the life of Newt Scammander. Any information released from J.K. Rowling, including the Fantastic Beast screenplays or films is now canon. Therefore, he is first and formest, a film character, not a book character, as you said.

Regards.

AECOATES (talk) 01:51, January 3, 2018 (UTC)

As Newt is not characterised, or developed on in the fantastic beasts and where to find them book, it would not be fair to call him a book character, based on his brief appearance. Also, the fantastic beasts films are not 'lower canon', as you call it, as they are written by the creator of the harry potter univirse, making them the higest form of canon there is! The screenplays do not make Newt a book character, as they serve on as reference as a creation for the films, and its publication was therefore not necessary. As Eddie Redymayne was handpicked by J.K. Rowling, it is safe to assume that his portrayal of the character is one she is satisfied suits Newts form, as 'no one else was ever considered'. Also, following your logic, pictures should also not be displayed on characters pages, as many characters in the film are not as Rowling describes them in the books. Keep in mind, that the screenplays are a blueprint for filmakers, not a detailed description of characters and their development. Physical description would be necessary, if the fantastic beasts films were 'lower canon', however in this instance, they are not.

Regards.

AECOATES (talk) 06:36, January 3, 2018 (UTC)   

Hi ironyak I was wondering if it would be ok to edit the grindelwald page to say one of the most dangerous dark wizards of all time. Ninclow insists that only british wizards call voldemort the most dangerous and that foreign wizards would have a different opinion but no such characters have appeared to confirm this theory, please let me know.

Freddy1428 (talk) 22:13, January 4, 2018 (UTC)

Inappropriate edit on Hermione's Talk page

The most recent edit to Hermione's talk page is inappropriate for a wikia, calling Harry Potter a White Supremecist. I don't feel that behavior or attitude belongs here. Goofyd00d (talk) 17:18, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

Heads up!

The userCady.Ann keeps spamming the page of Madam Hooch. Mind giving them a warning if they don't stop or something? Ninclow (talk) 01:36, January 21, 2018 (UTC)

Bone in Category:Wand cores

Hi, Ironyak! I've seen that the article Bone is in the Category:Wand cores. Do you know in which wand bone is used as core?  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 19:39, January 22, 2018 (UTC)

No problem, but is it correct then to put Bone into the Category:Wand cores?  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 18:10, January 25, 2018 (UTC)

Newt wand

I just thought you would like to know that Newt Samander's wand is ashwood. Eddie redmayne (newt) said so in his interveiw with Jimmy Fallon.

Inforleigh (talk) 08:00, January 24, 2018 (UTC)

That's interesting, but I fear that's not canon. But thanks nonetheless for this really interesting information.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 22:33, January 24, 2018 (UTC)

OK, I understand that

Thank you very much for informing me.Kintobor (talk) 18:04, January 29, 2018 (UTC)Kintobor

Walburga and Orion Black page

We can't decide on the image for the Walburga and Orion Black pages. The images of Walburga and Orion Black from the Black family portrait is more updated and appropriate but Seth Cooper says that those pages are the only places the image can be and both images can't be on the same page at once. What should we do? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 23:17, February 2, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Mr. and Mrs. Snyde Death Eaters?

Could you take a look on the Snyde family talk page when you get the time, please? Want to hear your take on it. ^^' Ninclow (talk) 03:11, February 10, 2018 (UTC)

Re:Edit warring

I can't see how I've been given much of a choice, really. Ninclow (talk) 04:17, February 23, 2018 (UTC)

It is outright baffeling how often you guys have mistaken one thing for another lately. First mistaken context for conjecture, then Potter-trivia for irrelevant to a web-based potter encyclopedia. And now you're confusing a figure of speech for something akin to a philosophical question. Might I ask how you would prefer me to phrase sentences so they're actually understood in the future? Ninclow (talk) 21:55, February 23, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Google indexing

Does it still show that? I just checked, and in my browser it looks right. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:21, February 23, 2018 (UTC)

Everything seems in order on my end ("Harry James Potter (b. 31 July 1980) is a half-blood wizard, one of the most famous wizards of..."), which is weird. At any rate, I sent them a message via Special:Contact. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 23:15, February 23, 2018 (UTC)


Am I missing someth- I just suck at math!

I already posted this at Seth's talk page, but I figured I might benefit from you throwing in your two cents too. ^^' If the character's fist year in Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mysteries takes place in 1984, it would mean that he/she was born around 1973, but there is something that don't seem quite right to me here. This would mean, unless we are to assume Merula Snyde lied about the rumors of Jacob working for Voldemort, that Jacob, at the latest, would have to have been born ca 1964, because he must have been at least sixteen or seventeen years old in at the time of his expulsion and subsequent running away from home for people to even consider the possibility that Jacob mgiht have joined Voldemort. On top of that, if he was born in 1964, he would have been 14 when his younger sibling was born, meaning around the time of his expulsion at 16 or 17, his sibling would be only two or three years old, and by the time he/she began attending school, Jacob's expulsion would be such old news that it is completely absurd for Jacob's sibling to get a hard time over it. Not to mention strange that people would still be talking about it, about eight, nine years after the fact. I mgiht have committed a logical fallacy somewhere here but - what do you think? Ninclow (talk) 18:43, February 28, 2018 (UTC)


Jacob joining Voldemort was only ever claimed once, and by Merula Snyde while mocking the player. I'd say Rowan's reasearch into Merula during which he discovered her parents were both imprisoned in Azkaban for "being loyal to Voldemort" and having "chosen evil" is more reliable than an off-hand comment of her supposedly having checked out Jacob's background. Sounds from the context more like she was lying to make life difficult for Jacob's sibling.Any other time his expulsion comes up, it is relating to the Cursed Vaults. And wouldn't that be old history? Ninclow (talk) 08:26, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

Possible vandal?

Hi, just thought I’d bring to your attention this user, http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/User:AdamMarkStout. I’ve looked at his edits, and all he’s done is vandalise a person’s own page by adding needlessly vulgar images and fake info. Should he be banned? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheTARDISLegilimens (talkcontribs).

I replaced the two obscene images he uploaded with SFW ones, and also tagged them for deletion; but this has not yet been done. — evilquoll (talk) 17:40, March 21, 2018 (UTC)

exaggeration

Hi ironyak

I was wondering if you could have a look at the grindelwald page, I think that the current edits right now are starting to border on speculation and exaggeration and was wondering would it be alright to change it.

Freddy1428 (talk) 09:27, March 9, 2018 (UTC)

Can you see my IP?

I have no recollection of making that deletion to Bill Weasley's page. I haven't, I think, edited that page at all today. Last thing I did was adding Bill's practicing of defensive spells in the training grounds to the Magical Abilities and Skills section. Can you see if any other IP have appeared on my user account? If yes, I need to change my password or something, because then it'd appear I have been hacked. Ninclow (talk) 07:41, March 10, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Lestrange family

Pages like Corvus Lestrange II and etc. were recently renamed and the pages of their family members need to be fixed so that the links are fixed to include the change.  Also, the C. Lestrange I and II pages need to be deleted since, I believe, the C. Lestrange page was once a redirect and you created the Corvus Lestrange III page from the redirect rather than renaming the C. Lestrange II page as well as the C. Lestrange disambiguation page since there are no more C. Lestranges. IlvermornyWizard (talk) 18:41, March 15, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Re:Crimes of Grindelwald Category

Hi, that's easy. You made a template and you have put the category into it. Change the name of the cat in the template and the template will itself put the pages into the new cat. You must only create the new cat and then can delete the old cat. The change will not happen at once, it needs time but the template will do it itself.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 22:15, March 16, 2018 (UTC)

The hurry up would be too much work. Open the page and save again. But when you have many pages that's too much work.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 22:20, March 16, 2018 (UTC)

FB spoiler templates

Would it be possible for the bot or by other means to automatically add the FB2 spoiler template? Or does the bot do it already? And how long will the FB1 spoiler template stay? The film has been released almost 1 1/2 years ago. Will it stay until CG is released?--Rodolphus (talk) 18:42, March 17, 2018 (UTC)

Deleting Flowertje's duplicate images

I was wondering if you could delete all of Flowertje's most recent duplicate images she uploaded for no apparent reason which is highly unnecessary? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 22:53, March 17, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Verb agreement?

What on EARTH are you on about now? Ninclow (talk) 11:40, March 18, 2018 (UTC)

Ah, right, were...


Fist off, why is Tonks naturally an accomplished duelist and just likely for Dawlish when both have had the same training, and if they weren't at the very least on pair with one another because of it, one of them wouldn't been able to become an Auror in the first place?  Secondly, just because you disagree with me, doesn't mean that it magically becomes "non-productive" or "disruptive" for me to explain myself on the talk page. And thirdly - will you STOP trying to pull the admin card on me? Being an admin don't mean you won't be wrong every now and again, and when I see you being wrong, as an editor, I have every right to do something about it. Especially if I feel the complete backwards, non-sensical way in which words such as "hyperbole", "speculation" and "conjecture" are being used as of late might compromise the integrity of the content by removing perfectly valid pieces of information out of what appear to be an occassional inability to look at a text in its entirety and just at the words. That being said, however, I shall use talk pages more and undo buttons less. Cheers. Ninclow (talk) 12:43, March 18, 2018 (UTC)


RE Overlinking

I'm so sorry!

Thanks for tellin' me! TheSonofCharlusPotter (talk) Always Active (talk) 00:26, March 20, 2018 (UTC)

Caitlin Malfoy???

http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Caitlin_Malfoy This page has no cites and looks to be entirely fanon? Can this be deleted? Estrildis (talk) 21:15, March 21, 2018 (UTC)

Yes! Me and another user have out this in ‘’’Candidates for deletion’’’ 3 Times but she keeps on deleting it...

This page was created by http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/User:Jenna17

 TheSonofCharlusPotter   Talk   contribs 21:46, March 21, 2018 (UTC)

Hogwarts Myster

Hello there, chief, just got a quick question from a guestie here if you got the time:

I usually use the Harry Potter Lexicon when I want to look stuff up, since I don't have to register and can just sort of send them a mail and wait for them to get around to me. But kudos to you for making an enclypedia that's like - a hundred times more detailed. Never thought I would see this much stuff in one place, I never pay attention to props and whatnot, so like - two minutes here is kind of a wakeup call about how much lore I've missed out on. *Clap, clap*! :)

Aaaaaanyway, I just happened to be trying to bleed google dry the other day looking for for news about the new update for Hogwarts Mystery, and stumbled accross the wiki page you got for the game here. Just started playing the new beta, when I noticed that - yeah, you can pick you own name, all right, but there's loads of default names to choose from too, and some of them are the same as names in the books/movies. At the top of my head, surenames like Jenkins, Davis and Thomas comes to mind. You seem to record everything, but I dunno if you would say default game names are official or not, but since I am at the start of the game, I could restart it, spam the "random" button on choosing names and slap together a list of (wizard?) familiy names for you, if you like? Don't know about you, but I think that a possible connection between the families we know the name of from the books and movies and the one the player can choose to stem from in the game by choosing one of the default ones is a fun bit of trivia. Don't think the Lexicon would be very interested in it though. =P 

Cheers! Covic (talk) 13:20, March 22, 2018 (UTC)

Stop Getting Rid of my Posts

Are you telling me that you are above J.K. Rowling? She even says that Ron is a drunk in later years and that Hermione never should have been with Ron. I find that I am completely in the right with my post. I find this site and Wikipedia to be a cult of Ron Weasley fans and I will not be bullied into silence. J.K Rowling’s message will be made known to the Harry Potter Fandom! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Snapefan1998 (talkcontribs).

@Snapefan1998, Two things to think about for when your block expires:
  1. Ironyak1 is an admin of this wiki, a long-term contributor, and a highly-valued editor; you are none of these things. It is not for you to tell Ironyak1 what to do; it's not quite the other way around, but that would be more accurate.
  2. You claim that "[JKR] says that Ron is a drunk in later years"; where does she say that? Give us a link, otherwise we only have your unsupported word for it. I have seen this (the fallacy / dishonest arguing trick of Appeal to Bogus Authority) numerous times, on this wiki and elsewhere.
evilquoll (talk) 01:33, March 24, 2018 (UTC)

Hey there! http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/User:Snapefan1998 has continued to vandalise and please see the history of the Hermione Granger page because he/she has continued to spam the Harry Potter Wiki even after your warning...  TheSonofCharlusPotter   Talk   contribs 23:27, March 23, 2018 (UTC)

Bot Ignore for "Steve Gray'"

Hello. I have tried to revert a couple of edits made by your bot regarding the name "Steve Gray" on the Witchita Banana page. However, it does not appear that your bot has a Botignore template nor a list of commands. The name should be Steve Gray, not Grey. UpgradeTech (talk) 03:51, March 24, 2018 (UTC)

FB 2 roles

Can you give advice on what to do with the Cassius Bell and Carrow (1920s) articles? It appears that the role names were changed to just Auror and Acolyte. Should the articles still be kept?--Rodolphus (talk) 16:51, March 24, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Creature infobox - Sentience

Hello, hello! The sentience field has been in infoboxes since -- well, since I can remember infoboxes. I think the original point was to distinguish between things like Onion and Mandrake, but I'll agree it's a prickly term: it is not necessarily easy to establish that, say, a Flobberworm is able to feel, perceive or experience subjectively without being outright told that. So, I wouldn't oppose getting rid of it.

About your previous message, which I never got round to answer (sorry!), I think the list of surnames is, if anything, best left at Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery. At least, I can't think of anything else to do with it. Cheers! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 19:33, March 27, 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ironyak!

User:Caairo11 has continued to translate the English text to another language... I gave him/her a ‘warning’ on his/her talk page on 26 March and recently he/she has done it twice again... also you have undone one of his/her edits because this problem...

 TheSonofCharlusPotter   Talk   Contribs 22:41, March 29, 2018 (UTC)

What part of the information I'm adding to the dinosaur page is not from an in universe source???

Is it:

  • Bird feather colours
  • Bird foot scales
  • Bird eye colour
  • Where birds live
  • Bird sizes

Whichever you chose, I will keep the rest on the dinosaur page, and pull them from any other page I find them in. Opdagon (talk) 19:08, April 3, 2018 (UTC)

  • GIVE AN EXPLAINATION, OR UNPROTECT THE 'DINOSAUR' PAGE.

Opdagon (talk) 19:14, April 3, 2018 (UTC)

Stop ignoring my questions

How on earth are all the sources valid on the pages for individual birds, but invalid when used to describe dinosaurs? If you have no answer for that questionUNPROTECT THE DINOSAUR ARTICLE. All the information in that infobox was based on the information for the pages for the birds (DINOSAURS) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Opdagon (talkcontribs).

I'll put it simply

Birds are dinosaurs. We have information on birds that is okay. Therefore, we have information on dinosaurs that is okay. I want to know how this information on dinosaurs become bad and OOU when collated and put on the dinosaur page.

Opdagon (talk) 19:49, April 3, 2018 (UTC)

So, should we just outright remove the dinosaur page?

Because, accord to what you said, we have no idea what the word dinosaur refers to? What else, should we remove primates from mammals, I'm quite sure they were never called mammals in-universe. What about removing that any characters are human, It probably wasn't said in any of the books. How about deleting vertabrates, vertabrates weren't mention in universe, right? What about scrapping the entire wiki because we have literally NO CLUE about what ANY word in the book means, because it wasn't explained in universe?

Opdagon (talk) 20:30, April 3, 2018 (UTC)

So, the bare amount includes the real life definiton

Therefore, it must state that birds are dinosaurs, as they are a top node. Therefore, bird traits are dinosaur traits. So, logic says we should have no wiki, or my version of the infobox.

Opdagon (talk) 20:55, April 3, 2018 (UTC)

Here is the definiton of dinosaur, pulled straight from one source on that page

"TriceratopsNeornithes, their most recent common ancestor, and all descendants."

So, we don't know about every shark, yet we have an infobox on the shark page. ITS THE EXACT SAME WITH DINOSAURS. We don't know about any non-avian dinosaurs, but we have plenty of information of the avian dinosaurs (BIRDS)


Opdagon (talk) 06:48, April 4, 2018 (UTC)

Moving?

Is it possible for a normal user to move an article? If you check the history of the God Save the Queen article, 1337star moved the page from National anthem of United Kingdom to God Save the Queen. If possible, could you tell me how to move pages? Thanks :}  TheSonofCharlusPotter   Talk   Contribs 08:36, April 8, 2018 (UTC)

RE: Imageless tag

Hi there, Ironyak! I’m so sorry for doing that! I will discontinue to do so! Thanks for the heads up! -- TheSonofCharlusPotter   Talk   Contribs 04:10, April 20, 2018 (UTC)

Image policy concerns?

Hi there! (not quite sure how to address you...) Um, I feel like I'm ratting out on other users, so I feel the need to clarify that what I find concerning is just a very, VERY minor part of the overall edits from this particular user, and I think the said user did do a hella lot of great contributions; I am in no way trying to get this person blocked or anything.

So, it started off when I finally discover who was behind those "Moments" images from Pottermore. Shortly afterwards, I also belatedly found out Pottermore has "/image/" (I was only aware of "/explore-the-story/," "/writing-by-jk-rowling/" ..etc) that provides the official images people used to have to screenshot to get. Thus I went adding the additional info, giving the artists' company the credits due, along with the exact source of the image, rather than the very general Pottermore link (some were even the Pottermore article on this wiki, and not the actual sit.)

In doing so, I also went uploading the official versions found on Pottermore, if the existing images on this wiki were of a lower quality; that was when I realized User:Misskatniss1546 has been sometimes replacing images that were clearly altered. Examples:

Please look at their File Histories to compare the tempered versions; some of them, I haven't even needed to see the original art work to be able to tell they were messed with; namely the previous versions of File:B7C14M1 Ron Splinched.png and File:B2C12M1 Sorting Hat in Dumbledore's office.png. Depending on the software used, they just looked like the curves/levels/exposure/contrast were adjusted.

I can only say, I understand the need of cropping if it's to highlight a small portion of a big picture; that kind of adjustments seemed regrettably necessary. What I don't find necessary, and am slightly offended to see, are the alterations of other people's artwork.

That being said, I don't believe it was done with ill intentions, but who are we to decide "this image needs to be brighter"? Shouldn't authenticity matter? Alas, I'm a nobody, I don't think it's my place to directly talk to the user, because I'm aware that I'm not good with writing and even when I'm just trying to lay out the facts to be logical and neutral, my words often come across as condescending and hostile. Which is why I'm writing to you instead. Hopefully you'd be able to give out a much abbreviated and friendly warning as to why the action shouldn't be done. That, or to let me know why it is acceptable to disregard the original art work.

Thanks for reading this! I'm horrible at being concise.

P.S.: If you have time, can you also take a look at User talk:Seth Cooper#Potter's kids' page name consistency? and the section beneath it? I don't know if there's a point of badgering the same person when they are busy, so I figured I'd reach out different people as well.

--Sammm✦✧(talk) 23:56, April 23, 2018 (UTC)

Etymology section

I believe you're making a mistake, here. While I see that you intend to keep out-of-universe information separate from the main body of the articles, the Etymology section is itself separate from such, as it's supposed to explain meanings that are rarely, if ever, elaborated in-universe. You may see in nearly every major article (just to name a few, Dudley Dursley, Antonin Dolohov, and Gilderoy Lockhart) that it's standard practise of the Wiki to use this section to take note of the known details of how the names of the subjects were chosen by Rowling. Loon Wolf (talk) 05:30, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

Andromeda Tonks Image Debate

Shouldn't her infobox image show her as an older woman since she currently is an older woman now rather than as a young girl when she isn't a young girl anymore? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 18:14, May 2, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Jacob's sibling a Seer

Can we add to Jacob's sibling's page that they used Divination (had visions that came true and might be a Seer)? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 03:47, May 9, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Walburga Black Image

Since the Andromeda Tonks image is on the same image, could the Walburga Black image be too? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 16:50, May 13, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Hey

Saw that you haven't been active since May 2. Hope that you and yours are all right. Take care. Starstuff (Owl me!) 10:51, May 15, 2018 (UTC)

Jacob's sibling a Seer?

Is it safe to say Jacob's sibling is a Seer since he had two visions of the future that has come true; first with the Cursed ice and then the Vault of Fear I think? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 15:01, June 9, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Adding all residents to dorms

Could all students who have ever been at Hogwarts, in a specific house, be added to their house's dorm pages? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 21:19, June 28, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

I never thought of it like that. However, there are a list of Known residents on the dorm pages and as Hogwarts students, they were residents of those houses. We don't have to do all residents, maybe just the ones with an exact school year/term like 1991-1998 so it isn't as long and difficult to maintain. IlvermornyWizard (talk) 16:15, June 29, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Lethifold Image

So there's a new image in the Lethifold page, a gif from the FBCoG trailer, and it's replaced the old, definitely-confirmed-as-a-lethifold image from the recent FB book. So far as I can find and tell, the the black cloaklike things in the trailer hasn't been confirmed as lethifolds, and given the size and the lethifold draped over buildings, its not acting like one either? I don't know if the image should be reverted, and asking for sources in addition to my own searches has garnered no response from the person who altered the image - or anyone else for that matter - so... I don't know what to do and you always seem to know what to do, so is it ok if I leave this problem in your capable hands? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Estrildis (talkcontribs).

Apologies for forgetting to sign. Thank you for sorting this. Estrildis (talk) 17:10, July 30, 2018 (UTC)

The Crimes of Grindelwald Extras

Could you help me find more extras who appeared in the upcoming Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald on StarNow.com who have not had any pages, please? (Hobbiton777 (talk) 19:30, July 30, 2018 (UTC))

Perenelle Flamel

I cannot seem to find a source for the image used on the page. Should I go ahead and delete it or... Estrildis (talk) 20:29, July 30, 2018 (UTC)

Bot help?

Hi there! You are the only admin I remember seeing with a bot, so I hope it's alright to ask this. I was in the process of writing the following to the talk page of w:c:dev:MassEdit, only to belatedly realize the statement "the script can only be used by high-level local staff (i.e. admins, content-moderators, and bots).", so there's no point posting it there as the script likely functions fine.

Would you be able to perform-mass changes of specifically "[[Quidditch]] team" to "[[Quidditch team]]"? Previously Quidditch team was in-ideally used as a redirect, so any article mentioning "Quidditch team", if linked, is styled as "[[Quidditch]] team". Since the situation is recently rectified and "Quidditch team" now being its own page, I've manually changed a few "[[Quidditch]] team" to "[[Quidditch team]]", but after a few edits, that's when I feel like, there must be a script for this kind of things! Which led me to the script, and finding out I couldn't use it due to the user group.

I hope the desired changes isn't unreasonable? Special:WhatLinksHere/Quidditch team is quite short, no doubt cuz of the former circumstances. Thanks! --Sammm✦✧(talk) 19:36, August 29, 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! A little scared to ask... But was it intentional that, instead of changing "[[Quidditch]] team" to "[[Quidditch team]]", the bot changed "[[Quidditch]] team" to "[[Quidditch]] [[Quidditch team|team]]"? Like "Quidditch team". In some of the articles, there're already links to "Quidditch", so I'm a little confused about this treatment. D; --Sammm✦✧(talk) 18:01, September 27, 2018 (UTC)
I see, that makes a lot of sense, so I think most of them wouldn't have to have additional changes (I guess, I don't even remember which article I clicked on but it turns out most really didn't have the other link;) the ones I spotted that do though, are International Quidditch Tournament, Hogwarts Quidditch pitch, and Quidditch pitch (there could be more, but it's hard to tell what pages I should be looking to check. Hogwarts Quidditch pitch is probably in a worse situation (not that it's anything serious) since "Quidditch pitch" also got separated (yes, there's still a "Quidditch" link in the article). I think there might be a couple that do have options for "Quidditch" to be linked as its own, but have not been. Am editing Gwenog Jones at the moment, which fits this case. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 02:41, September 28, 2018 (UTC)

Apology

Hi Ironyak1 -- I left a similar message on Talk:Nagini but wanted to make sure you saw this: I am sorry if my message there seemed to infer my being an administrator for longer than you gave me special consideration or as you called it "pulling rank." That was not my intention at all; I was trying to show that I was acting in the best interests of the wiki since I have been an administrator here for longer than I have been a FANDOM employee. I apologise unreservedly for the misunderstanding and my bad choice of words in the thread. - Cavalier OneGryffindorcrest(Wizarding Wireless Network) 18:36, September 25, 2018 (UTC)

Certainly, I can try and shed some more light on this. Yesterday, the Maledictus article and the Nagini article were the most visited article pages across the FANDOM network. Not just the most visited pages on the HPW, but every wiki. As you can imagine, this traffic increase is almost entirely because of the trailer and Nagini reveal (I think there was more on Pottermore as well, but the trailer is the main focus). People were actively searching for Nagini because of this, so in my view at least the article should be updated as much possible for the benefit of the visitors/readers. Certainly, the article was very much updated (I merged the outstanding articles into one to avoid confusion) except for the image which, due to the policy obviously remains as the snake. The article though is that people are coming here specifically because of that reveal, and not having the current human form/COG image in the infobox kinda seems like we are not giving them what they have come to look for. With this spike in traffic for just the trailer, that gives us some indication that Nagini will be a huge search term during the Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald release (and the run-up) so positioning the "current" image front and center can only be a boon to us. Most of the other sites competing for the COG Nagini traffic will most likely use the Claudia Kim image in their articles, so for us not to use it might lead people to assume we are not as updated as we should be. I hope that information helps! - Cavalier OneGryffindorcrest(Wizarding Wireless Network) 17:19, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

Nagin image discussiom

Hi Ironyak1

Was just reading your discussion regards the Nagini image and was reminded of the recent StarWars FANDOM guideline discussion as laid out by FANDOM.

The whole guideline can be found here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qP4lrZFlzKiDpKFzreyYXQwDGPFw2guVCYcZZfwbKaw/mobilebasic

but specifically I refer you the following paragraph where FANDOM discuss Spoiler lock downs.

In short- Spoilers lock downs are innappropriate for the Discussions area, which is specifically refered to as being 'unlike wikis'

Not sure if this actually clarifies anything, but makes for a recent FANDOM clarification regards Spoilers (and where to find them..)

"Other heavy-handed policies have included the spoiler lockdown for the most recent Star Wars movies, including Solo, in which users were told they couldn’t post spoilers outside of dedicated threads until one week after the film’s release. This is directly counter to the spirit and intentions of the Discussions platform. When Discussions was conceived and developed, FANDOM recognized that we had an opportunity to do something that wikis can’t: capture pre-release hype and post-release buzz in a conversational way. That’s unlike wikis, which captures information and a ton of traffic after a release but doesn’t generate conversations beyond talking about editing pages. By having a spoiler lockdown and only allowing one thread, in a time when people want to rush to social media platforms —and Discussions is much more of a social media platform than a message board, which we’ll touch on more in a moment—to talk about the movie, you are effectively telling fans that they are not welcome to contribute and that the Wookieepedia Discussions community is closed to everyone but a small handful of users who have dominated the conversation about what the policies should look like"

The Dark Marc(talk) 06:26, September 26, 2018 (UTC)


Thanks for your insight regards this issue. I'd agree that FANDOM intent for Discussion to capture Hype does run at odds to the difficulty in finding specific Discussion via a Search Engine. Perhaps this will be part of the updates due to be rolled out in the near future. The Dark Marc 07:12, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Hogwarts Mystery templates

First of all, thanks for the reply on bots and Quidditch team!

I'm replying on the matter you asked another User, because, I made the first 3 HM variant templates. The reason is because, each Year is essentially its own story arc, with its own individual chapters. That's severn Hogwarts school years, which is represented in 7 different book template to achieve the same effect.

Granted, chapters of each Year so far does not reach more than 20, that is still a lot. I made them separately after a great deliberation, because, if fitting them all into one, the template would actually have to be written longer (with "Year" as an additional parameter, every variable would have to include "Year x" instead of having it set shown no matter what.) Users would also have to type longer (just a tiny bit) for the template to work, at least if constructing it the way it now works.

(FYI, I had asked for help initially at Template talk:HM, but because it really was needed I ended up trying to figure out how to do it myself. Not perfect, but it was better than nothing. By then, I realized the obstacle of different chapters for different years, so it's more complicated than what I wrote on the Talk page.)

As to why there's 2p and not 1p, it's because specific lessons happen in specific chapters. Chapter 1 of Year 1 is completely set in Diagon Alley, not even setting foot in Hogwarts yet. Later on, Chapter 2 has Potions and Charms, and those respective specific lessons. You don't learn them in other chapters, they are particularly tied to those chapters. You have to complete them in order to progress in the game to move onto the next chapter, alongside completing the story arc.

I mean, it's not even about if I would mind the merge, but I do hope all the functions could be retained, and if it's manageable, I'm super onboard with that. <3 --Sammm✦✧(talk) 17:27, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

That sounds about right (I think,) though, there are other multiple and different lessons of same subjects? {{HMy4}} is a fuller example...
Say, would the new way be able to do this?
  • HM|4|2|p = {{HMy4|ch|2|2p}}
  • HM|4|5|p = {{HMy4|ch|5|5p}}
Notice they are different potion lessons. And the third parameter are both the same "p;" I was told it's not achievable to have the same thing displaying different stuff depending on parameters before it, would really like to know if that's not the case. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 18:31, September 26, 2018 (UTC)
And just to clarify, it will also recognize to act differently when the parameter for Year is different? OMG I literally cannot wait to see how it is done! Because I have templates for books on other wikis, and I asked the Staff if I can just have them in one template and have them display different titles to the obvious different chapters of each book, and the Staff was like no; so while I still made them into one template, I had to do something similar to the 2p/5p stuff, also repeatedly having to put the chapter numbers when setting up the template. (And yes, there will be mixed up if entering them wrong with this method, as you've pointed out. I guess I was unlucky that the Staff that helped me didn't know to use what could have been done.) --Sammm✦✧(talk) 19:14, September 26, 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I've viewed it, and I think knowing how I could place the switch {{{3}}} in specific places for specific results should be very useful. To me though, personally I feel like repetitively inputting the same thing calls for shortcuts, which was why when I set it up, I didn't want to constantly having to copy and paste "Year [...], Chapter [...] (''[...]'')" only to have the [...] swapped out; I thought I could make the constants fixed as they are and only use the parameters to change what's different. (That's also why I think {{PM}} probably could use some tweaking and group news/features/writings by J. K. Rowling etc. so that the variables won't needed to be repeated so much (and failed to figure out how to do it so left it at that.)) I'm assuming there's really just no way around it?
Overall, my personal weird "I-don't-want-to-copy-the-same-thing-over-and-over" thing aside, I think it's looking great! Do you want just edit it on the original {{HM}} template? Also, would your bot be able to switch out what's previously using those variants into the would-be-updated template? --Sammm✦✧(talk) 20:31, September 26, 2018 (UTC)
I think back then the action of splitting them into "ch" and "SQ" was in the attempt of not having to repeat the "chapters", parentheses, and italics. But yeah, I agree that the less "codes" to remember or having to look up, the better. TBH, I don't remember what lesson appears in what chapter, I only want to at least make it so that people don't have to type out all that when citations are needed lol. Unless the game drastically change the structure, I think the way you've set it up is good to go.
(You are superb for figuring it out in this span of time!) The minor thing is that the respective lessons haven't been completely listed. I've tried my best to go through what I remembered to update those variants, but I know they aren't done. And some of the Side Quests are at the moment a little ambiguous chronologically, but there's not much we can do about it. (Kinda really wish they'd just released it a little later rather than prematurely. Owells.)
The PM discussion I think I'll elaborate on its own Talk page if I ever felt the necessity to do so. Also feel like sharing my "condition"; I feel like I definitely have "something" specific, I'm not sure if "OCD" can cover it sufficient enough, but I've realized I have this obsession with "sorting" things, which is super ironic because IRL my room's a mess, but data-wise, I have a hard time controlling the impulse to not "sort," it's inappropriate enough that a lot of times it actually hinders my RL priority, which is why I know that, while a part of me would really like to reply to the PM part, Ima end up loosing the rest of my day should I choose to do so.
(Hope this isn't creepy, I'm legitimately worried about my behavior, and I'm not sure if I've downplayed the severity so my doctor didn't look particularly worried about it when I confessed about the problem.) I think it doesn't help that IRL I don't know anyone as into this fandom but I'm desperate to share the love. lol. Really hope this doesn't weird you out, but I think by admitting to having a problem, it does make me feel better lmao, you just happen to be the person I'm likely to interact with some more in the future, so I figured I should warn you in some way.
That being said, not sure when the next time I'd catch you when you're available, so I'll just asked them here. Can you take a look at Template talk:Education and Template talk:Quidditch team? I think the problem raised in the first one is a bit long overdue, and the second one, if I'm understanding it correctly, only needs to add "|Unknown" to the parameters to make it do the extra (at least I think so.)
And... now I really need to take a break to do HW. Really need to thank you again for being so helpful! And thanks for being so patient! --Sammm✦✧(talk) 23:11, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

┌─────────┘

Hey there! Just letting you know I also left a followup question on the "bot help" section above!

For {{Education}}, still a little unsure about the block color (feels very un-Hogwarts to me, so I tweaked to using thin lines for separation for now;) did not change the content, but replied on the Talk page.

For {{Quidditch team}}, I think aesthetic adjustment is a different issue (not that I don't agree, because I do,) it's just that as demonstrated in the first 7 squads shown on Gryffindor Quidditch team#Members of Gryffindor team, "Unknown" is a super frequent input; so it'd really be nice for it to be set as default.

And thanks for the understanding! I'm still struggling with the "trick" so to speak; I think even though very tasking, I might have to actually set out goals and designate how much time to spend on editing, and try to strictly follow it. Will see how it goes. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 00:09, September 28, 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! I didn't realize the significance of this until seeing recent citations... (sort of feel guilting for not paying enough attention to this aspect)
I think besides "chapter" and "side quest", another type needs to be added to {{HM}}: "achievement". Because those are time-limited, I never realized I've been going through the 4-part side quests with individual quest names within the "achievement", and up til now have been just mislabeling the entire bunch with side quest "x [when x is actually the overall achievement name]". (Though in my defense, I think the confusion stems from the first two available achievements both happening to have close to the same name as their respective first side quests, so I didn't notice the names changing upon completion)
So far, we got:
  • Year 1
    • "Party Planner" Achievement
      • Part 1, Side Quest "Happy Birthday, Hagrid!"
      • Part 2, Side Quest "Use Your Charms"
      • Part 3, Side Quest "Very Special Guests"
      • Part 4, Side Quest "Hagrid's Magical Birthday Party"
(and another one recently awaiting for documentation)
  • Year 3
    • "Become an Animagus" Achievement
      • Part 1, Side Quest "Become an Animagus!"
      • Part 2, Side Quest "Animagus Potion"
      • Part 3, Side Quest "Animagus Lessons"
      • Part 4, Side Quest "Time For Your Transformation"
  • Year 4
    • "Become a Prefect" Achievement
      • Part 1, Side Quest "Become a Prefect!"
      • Part 2, Side Quest "Disciplinary Action"
      • Part 3, Side Quest "Earn Your Badge"
      • Part 4, Side Quest "You Are Almost a Prefect!"
For a brief moment, I feel liked I figured it out how to do it, and then the thought is gone lol. I'll try to see if I can sort this out. But yeah, just documenting my thoughts before I loose them. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 15:38, October 20, 2018 (UTC)
Okay, took me a few tries but I think I did it. If there's a smarter way to do it, please proceed! Would love to learn! =D --Sammm✦✧(talk) 16:39, October 20, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Nagini image

Everything's going fine (even though I've been very much exhausted these past couple of weeks), thanks for asking! I haven't seen you around much lately; how have you been? Best, --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:29, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

Image and Category

There's an image that is completely black and has no image on it at all, could you delete it or have the user to replace it to an actual image? Do you think there should be a category for the French Ministry of Magic? There already is a category for the Ministry of Magic, but that one is only meant for just the British Ministry not all of them? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 04:53, September 27, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Archive of Magic Images

Where do you keep finding all these images from Archive of Magic when it hasn't even come out yet? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 23:08, October 1, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Chocolate Frog Cards

Hi there! I have read the analysis and didn't change my opinion on the matter (I proposed it after having read it for some time.) I don't think "is vast and there is some overlap with our in-universe" should deter the action, because Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them and its real world counterpart can be argued having large overlap as well. I am not saying the content provided by those cards aren't considered canon, but the fact that they are produced as real life product is something to be noted, with the fact that, should a specific reference be considered true, at least in one case, Daisy Dodderidge's, the RL product did provide contradicting info.

I didn't think reorganizing it was that much of a problem. Yes, it took time (a lot of time, to be fair,) but it shows how much it bothered me to motivate me to compile User:Sammm鯊/Chocolate Frog Cards. I don't believe it'd be use, so I'm keeping it as personal reference regardless. Really can't find stuff quick enough in the current page. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 01:58, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

No need to apologize? Because you actually summed it up pretty well? I personally don't find mixing cards with clear-OOU-designs with the other cards a pleasant reading experience; even when the text is considered cannon, the images just messed with my brain. I understand this is a personal preference, so I'm voicing that the current set up is lengthy but with little purpose, especially with the ones with wordings only being slightly different from one another, major differences being the source and the card image. I feel that if they are real cards, separate them as such, at best, add them in the BTS section to highlight that, hey, they are considered canon, too! But you can actually buy them etc. unlike the rest. That's just me though. I wouldn't be too upset if the community wish to leave those RL cards within the in-universe article; yes, I find it hard to locate information, but I have the documentation so I'm all good. I don't want to be like I'm forcing it to get it done my way or anything, hope it doesn't come across that way. D;
--Sammm✦✧(talk) 03:57, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

Cases from the Wizarding World timeframe

I seem to remember Professor Kettleburn in the HM game mention that the group advocating fairy preservation that a recent thing? "We used to, but now we got this group ..." can't remember the chapter,  but sounds like FBCftWW and HM takes place roughly the same time. Maester Martin (talk) 20:33, October 7, 2018 (UTC)

Shame on you

Then… --Koppa Dasao ƒłелањі каселањін на 23:34, October 8, 2018 (UTC)

Images

I'm not vandalizing images, I'm putting new versions of images. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geoffrey Leland Doctor (talkcontribs).

Wand descriptions

Could there be descriptions of wands on their pages such as designs, styles, and etc.? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 00:30, October 15, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

2014 QWC

Hi, there! I know this is so late to be brought up, but better late than never? lol Um, so, is it alright for me to create a navbox for all the 2014 Quidditch World Cup Daily Prophet articles? Right now, I think Category:2014 Quidditch World Cup should include all of them, but it's not in the order of the when the articles were released and just the standard alphabetical order by the first letter of the title. There's also no quick way to navigate from one article to the next in chronological order. Just figured it'd make navigation through this bunch a lot more easier. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 17:22, October 16, 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! (BTW, a little late on this, but what do I call you? Like even the user name I'm having trouble deciding on seeing it as "iron yak1" or "irony ak1", which sounded very different when I pronounce them in my brain lol)
Um, but yeah, the navbox is at {{2014QWC articles}}, it's the best I could do atm, unsure if the articles titles needed to be italicized, if so, let me know. Also am unsure about 2014 Quidditch World Cup final; I mean, it's not an "article", but it's still a coverage from the Daily Prophet, and everything was leading towards that finale; Kind of want to add it to the bottom of the template, just to showcase it's different from the rest. I think I'll go work on it after sending out this message, and you can review it to see if it's appropriate?
Meanwhile, is it possible to make a quick decision on Template talk: Real book infobox? I honestly feel the interior artists and audio narrators are deprived their proper credits due to the lack of their fields on the infobox.
Raised two questions at Seth's page, but I think the more people chipping in their thoughts, the better; more urgently want to know about Talk:Flying (class), whether or not in canon, flying was explicitly stated to be first years only. Most recent question I threw on it's respective talk page and hoping random people would look into, was Talk:Hogwarts subjects#Classifications. Not urgent, but figured I'd just ask in case it's a quick answer. If it's not, don't feel pressured to respond!
Now I'm off to play with the template! --Sammm✦✧(talk) 04:53, October 18, 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Ironyak1.

Okay, so - it might be the case that you don't intend for me to take it that way, but I am - and this is no disrespect intended - left feeling like you have a grudge against me. Any chance we can simply talk this over? Maester Martin (talk) 20:43, October 17, 2018 (UTC) Sorry you feel that way, but there is no grudge, nor any tolerance for yet more speculation and arguments over its plausibility. If you don't have a reference, then expect the edits to be removed. If you try and force your edits, then a block and/or ban will result. You've already been warned by Seth that your participation here is extremely tenuous given your history and violation of policies, so please find a productive way to contribute. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 22:01, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

With respect, you could have fooled me. Becuse from where I am standing, it would appear you think I try to "force my edits" as a matter of course, which is completely ridiculous. I admit the discussion on the meaning of 'pure-blood' in regard to Slughorn's blood status were one where it took me an embartassingly long time to catch what you were getting at, but at no point since I came back have I engaged in something that even remotely resembles an edit war, and I have not made a big deal or breathed further life in already long-winded dialouge lest other people have given me every reason to think a given subject is up for discussion. Take Hestia Jones, for example. I made an edit, Seth undid it, I undid his edit, clarifying why I made my first edit, and when he did not accept my explonation and undid it again, I simply dropped it. Again, with all due respect, me undoing a single edit from you does not constiute an edit war, and if you're, for a lack of a better word, intolerant, because of things I've done in the past, well, I'm sorry to say, that's on you. You didn't clarify why you removed what I wrote in Abernathy's article, you just did. So of course, I thought you removed my edits because you thought them to be inaccurate, which I in my commentary for why reverting it to my edit. If the were the references that was an issue - which I forgot about - why undo anything at all? You could just have popped over to my talk page and told me/reminded me/asked me to add the references, and I'd said; "Oh, right - I forgot, sorry, doing it now", and that would've been the end of it. 

We have to find a better way of communicating than this, otherwise, I will have to talk to any admin but you if there is something I need to bring to admin attention (with the exception of spammers/vandals). Because as things currently stands, it feels like you think I am willy-nilly poking sticks into wheels for fun, and I would be the first to admit that I'm not perfect, but that doesn't stop Seth from using his words instead of his "badge". And no, I am not accusing you of somehow abusing your position, I am just saying that we should be able to talk out indifferences/misunderstandings without that positioned being appealed to as means to "solve it", because I don't think that will really solve anything, and might be impractical for the both of us in the long run.  Maester Martin (talk) 00:03, October 18, 2018 (UTC)  


Okay, just to get these things off the table:
Nothing about what I added on Abernathy's page was in any shape or form speculative, it all came from trailers and commentary from David Yates, etc, I had simply forgotten to list my sources. And by the time I realized that was what the problem was issue, time had gotten away from me, and I had to go to bed to be up early for work. Thereafter - a busy day followed, and by the time I came home, I had forgotten about it. Which is why I have yet to re-add what I wrote there with references.
I undid Hestia Jones' page once, not several times, once. And on that occassion, I even wrote as a comment; "If you undo my edit after this, I'll leave it be, but ...", I gave my reason for my edit, he undid it, and leave it be I did. Please check the edit history if you doubt me.
The Slughorn's discussion is already accounted for, so bringing it up serves no practical purpose.
As for Flamel's wand - well, to be fair, until rather recently, adding plausibly speculative statements to the BTS have been common and almost something of a secondary purpose of the Behind the scenes sections since time immemorial, such as speculating into the biological reasons for a victim's death on the Killing Curse page, how the Cricuatus Curse presumably triggers a magical effect in the pain centre of the victim's brain since it causes to physical effect, Voldemort's page where it tries to determine if Voldemort's body was physically younger than he were chronoligcally due to losing and regaining his old body, The Avis page speculate if it can be used to block the Killing Curse by conjuring birds and have them fly in frontt of the killing curse, the Banishing Charm page speculates in the BTS section about whether it was used in the Battle of Hogwarts non-verbally or not, the Boggart page, where the question of "if Boggarts can change into intangible fears like darkness, certain sounds or mental/physical illnesses" is raised and goes on to speculate into how it might take on forms to represent these fears, and on it goes. And it was never a problem until sometime mid- to late last year, which has confused me to an extent.
And I saw that you just said; "all this points to you continuing your usual mode of unproductive editing", and with all due respect, no it doesn't. What it points to, although I neither think it is intentional on your part, nor fueled by any sort of mean-minded intent, is that you appear to expect me to make a whole lot of unproductive edits and to "distrub the peace", and so that's what you see. This to me appears to be more of a "you see what you expect to see" thing.
However unecessary you percieve discussions regarding my edits to be, Ironyak1, is irrelevant. If I believe I have a good reason to make an edit, I am well within my rights to voice it, and you stand completely free to either not participate, or to end it at any point by giving a reasonable explonation for why my edit was undone, and why the matter is not up for discussion, which I would of course, believe it or not, respect completely. 
That being said, I will keep it in mind and remember to add references at my next edit. :-) Maester Martin (talk) 07:53, October 18, 2018 (UTC)

Question

Okay, so - I just have to ask; If you want to undo my edit because you find it as speculative, fine, that's your call, but - where in canon is it ever said that "most children are home-schooled", that they "don't have to even finish school" or "much less do well in classes to work for MoM"? Maester Martin (talk) 13:55, October 19, 2018 (UTC)

Re:Multiple Accounts

That's what I thought! I believe User:Reverb frost brought up this issue because I justified the ban with "abusing of multiple accounts", better just change the justification then... Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 16:43, October 19, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Appearances chronology

Hiya! It's been long-established practice to list first the seven novels/films/games, then the other canon in rough real-world chronological order (it's so established, in fact, that I had no idea the layout guide actually said that).

Using the in-universe chronology might pose some issues (i.e. where should we put Quidditch Through the Ages ? Or Pottermore? Or Harry Potter Trading Card Game? Or The Wizarding World of Harry Potter?) so it doesn't seem to be the best strategy at any rate. I think it would be better to simply alter the layout guide to reflect this: perhaps it should include an approved "order of precedence" for Appearances sections? Cheers, --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 00:32, October 21, 2018 (UTC)

Roxanne's blood status

We mightn't know the mother's blood status but we do know the father's and because of the father's she can't be muggleborn. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gracey72 (talkcontribs). 

Bot assistance #2

Hi, went specifying Category:Unidentified individuals a little by sorting out Category:Unidentified Muggles; while most are successfully relocated by the script I run, this following bunch is for unknown reason not working, stating that category not found so could not be replaced, but with Category:Unidentified individuals still clearly included:

Unidentified Big Bean Shack spokeswoman
Vernon Dursley's secretary
Unidentified guitarist
Tarquin McTavish's neighbour
Unidentified Mould-on-the-Wold boys
Unidentified Muggle family
Unidentified Muggle driver
Unidentified Muggle man
Unidentified Muggle man who accidentally pushed Harry Potter in 1991
Unidentified Male Muggle looking at Rubeus Hagrid in 1991
Newspaper seller
Unidentified Muggle woman
Unidentified Muggle woman (II)
Staring Muggle
Unidentified Muggle woman who was looking at Rubeus Hagrid in 1991
Unidentified five Muggles
Unidentified orphan
Unidentified TV weatherman

Are you able to help replacing the category for those pages with the bot? While doable, I definitely don't want to spend time on changing them manually. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 02:59, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

Not sure if this entry was missed or not having time to be processed, so a nudge of a reminder. Still kind of confused as to why the script can't perform properly for those specific pages; tried again and same thing, even though they do contain the category to be replaced in question.
On a different note, this one may need Admin assistance but the Bot may be okay as well, unsure. Can you help rename Hogwarts Uniform back to the proper way it was previously titled: Hogwarts uniform? I tried to raise the question on its talk page, but with all the major things going on, it seems to be overlooked.
Due to a series of questionable edits and what I brought up in HPW:RAA#Template:Official post infobox/Draft, I'm concerned about User:CosmicChronos's insistence on becoming an Admin. I am confident that the current Admins would make the best decision for the wiki, and should the request is met with approval, I will show my support. However, I do think someone with better tact should approach the candidate for some pep talk accompanied by some "please-really-consider-this" advise; the quality of the editing I'm seeing from this user is not what I consider a good example set up by an Admin (to-be, or not); randomly capitalizing letters (another example: https://harrypotter.wikia.com/index.php?title=Unidentified_female_Hogwarts_teacher&diff=1149264&oldid=1147702) just seem like a very juvenal misinformed action, then there's the creation of Unidentified Ministry witch (I), which in itself may not be problematic, but the in-universe character was introduced with OOU information. The list goes on.
As an editor, personally I think those type of edits are kind of painful to look at, but I know I'm not an eloquent person (I can already see myself sounding condescending when that's not the intention) to neutrally ask the user to simply read the policy. So I hope someone can perhaps do it. Or not. lol (it's not some critical action.)
As for Astronomy; I think my purpose of the pitch was not explained well. Yes, there's "still over 100 links to this" BECAUSE it was changed as a redirect! All those linked pages are using it to get to Astronomy (class), because that page was previously titled Astronomy, but was renamed by the user in question https://harrypotter.wikia.com/index.php?title=Astronomy_%28class%29&diff=1145778&oldid=1145777 edit summary being "Renaming to resemble the names of other subjects", which, I tried to point out, the only reason those other subjects are named the way they are, were because there are things to differentiate from, which Astronomy did not have. What is the point of redirecting "Astronomy" to "Astronomy (class)", when simply naming the page as "Astronomy" had been perfectly fine until the user decided to rename it to match up with other articles that are in a different situation? I'm genuinely confused.--Sammm✦✧(talk) 17:48, October 24, 2018 (UTC)
Hey there! No idea how bots worked (tried to read the Help page and was almost immediately lost as to what was being described lol.) You've convinced me to seek other ways with "take longer than just editing them by hand"; that sounds horrible! I'll see if changing the target would help. If not, it's not like it'd be painful to do it manually, so I'm mentally prepared for it. xP
I was a little confused about HPW:RFP (have read the policies but still slightly confused,) I guess for some reason, I thought regular users, other than nominating themselves, were not to participate. (No idea why I thought that was the case.) The user in question has replied to me about the above; at this moment, I no longer have any lingered doubts about the hypothetical future editing problems I previously worried about, therefor I don't think it'd need to go on the request page (for now.)
The Astronomy thing is a separate question though, it was just a coincidence that the action was made by the same user, but I would have raised the same question even if it was done by someone else. I'm assuming I should be taking this to its own talk page. Will do. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 19:27, October 24, 2018 (UTC)
Quick update! I may have found the reason why the script wasn't performing! I ran it again (previously targeting "Unidentified individuals" to be replaced by "Unidentified Muggles" and then have to run the list again to remove "Muggles" as the latter would have already specified it) this time, I targeted "Muggles" to be replaced instead, and will then remove "Unidentified individuals". I almost thought none of them got through again, but there was one. It seems that the other pages were not able to be processed, due to having specifications filled out in the "Optionally, you may alphabetize this page on the "x" category page under the name:" dialogue. No idea how to get around this, so I'll go forward with just doing it by hand. lol --Sammm✦✧(talk) 19:43, October 24, 2018 (UTC)

About Eulalie

I would just like to defend the information I wrote under Eulalie's Etymology section, as I do believe it will become relavent over the course of the films, particularly in regards to Poe's poem. 

Firstly, I believe all the information I wrote on her surname should remain, as it's likely the connection to hickory wood may have been the reason she was given that name - on top of that, the information regarding Clarisse Tremblay's surname on her page is still there, unless you think that should go too? And "hick" is a derogetory name used for people in America... the country she teaches in.

On her first name, I mostly believe the connection to Poe's poem is intentional because, obviously, Rowling would have read his work, and it's plot and inspiration does seem, in my opinion, to suggest a connection to Credence (the fact that he also wrote "The Raven" also supports my hunch). Garr9988 (talk) 17:59, October 22, 2018 (UTC)


I was not implying that Clarisse's surname has any bearing on the wood her wand was made from. When I added that information about Aspen wood, I took it more to be an indication of her personality, not necessarily of what her wand was. Garr9988 (talk) 18:31, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

Request for Perms

Ah, I apologize for removing the comment as I was uder the assumtion that the voting had already started... However I dont want too seem too hasty, but could the vote start then?

Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 12:47, October 23, 2018 (UTC)

Obviously I've read the Voting Policy, no doubt about that. One thing that isn't written there however is how long a vote takes, is it just till you get a majority of 3(+) votes? Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 07:05, October 24, 2018 (UTC)
I deleted that comment because I assumed the voting had started (which apparently it hadn't) and thus his vote wouldnt be eligible(at least twenty article edits). Now let's see him do those twenty just to vote against me xD. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 17:48, October 24, 2018 (UTC)
You can start the vote btw. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 16:42, October 26, 2018 (UTC)
BumpCosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 13:31, October 28, 2018 (UTC)
Right, is it because of my deletion of his comment? I understand if you might think that I was biased towards him (you've surely noticed that I don't quiet enjoy him, for several reasons), but that really isn't the case. If anyone else had made a comment, either negative, of positive towards me, but they weren't eligible to vote, I'd have removed their comment as well. I also understand if you feel like it wasn't in my place to remove his comment, and instead it should've been an admin that did it. I completely understand, I know full well that I cant act like the police, however much I wish to. Finally, I hadn't understood that the vote hadn't begun. My fault, again, I should've understood that an admin would have to give a second confirmation for it to begin. So I want to apologize, for all these mistakes. Sorry. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 19:14, October 30, 2018 (UTC)

Dmods additional rights

Hey there, I am Reverb frost a community councillor and a global discussion moderator. The rights that a moderator needs to moderate discussion board are deletion and restoration of posts, locking and inlockongvof posts, editing posts. Other than that Other than that, arround the month of December,17(not sure about the exact month) the Dmods were given additional rights to ban users on dboards and wiki as well. Other than that there is no other special functions that an admin can do. Hope it helps. Reverb frost (talk)

As stated in my proposition, having an administrator on the team will greatly help us, please read my proposition before coming with ridiculous arguments that have no standing here. The vote will happen. Also, learn to sign your comments. In addition, it would do you well to learn the functions of an Admin, and the responsibilities of a Community Councillor, such as respect of other users, and not directed attacks on other users based on personal opinions. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 06:13, October 24, 2018 (UTC)

Theory noted

Noting for posterity, what if Gellert Grindelwald's skull hookah is made from Ariana Dumbledore's skull? She is the link between Albus, Gellert, and Credence (as well as the Unidentified Sudanese Obscurial that Newt just happened to have recently "discovered") so it would make sense she plays even a larger role in Grindelwald's vision of the coming conflict. Just nothing this here for now. --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:49, October 25, 2018 (UTC)

You may like to have a watch of the following video. The subject matter is very dark, but it discusses the preparation of a (childs) skull for Necromantic purposes. Some of the revelations are quite interesting- like the use of a Credence table and the detail that the name of the Necromancer in question is also used in a Shop name found in Knock Turn Alley (mentioned in a later video- trying find it o confirm).

https://youtu.be/AIQpePfVAKI

The Dark MarcSlytherincrest (talk) The Dark Marc 22:29, October 25, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Quick chat?

Sorry, sorry, I was distracted! I'll join you there straightaway. (And, I think you've on to something above! The whole Obscurus business has always screamed "Ariana" since I first watched FB1). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 19:01, October 26, 2018 (UTC)

Amazon images

Where did you get the Amazon images from some Crimes of Grindelwald book? IlvermornyWizard (talk) 08:00, October 27, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Two categories each for the same characters

For Porpentina Goldstein/Scamander and Newt Scamander there are two separate categories for just one character. One for each character needs to be deleted, so that there's only one. IlvermornyWizard (talk) 20:04, October 27, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard


Tense bot?

Most pages on spells, potions etc. still use the present tense, although it is policy to use past tense in all in-universe articles regardless of subject. Would it be possible to use a bot to correct this? It would take alot of work to do it manually.--Rodolphus (talk) 08:19, October 28, 2018 (UTC)

Notability

Hi there! I genuinely would like to know if the series of "unidentified" individual articles that User:Hobbiton777 has been creating meet the HPW:NG#Characters standard; because if they do qualify to be individual pages, I'd want to know about it ASAP so I won't be barking up the wrong tree and pestering the user for no reason; but if not, well, I did already leave the message and the pages are still being created, so I'd like to know what the situation is. Thanks! --Sammm✦✧(talk) 23:09, October 28, 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm sorry if the question was unclear; I know all the actors get their pages, so your first immediate respond isn't answering to anything that was a part of the question; I don't have a question about whether or not they should be on this wiki at all.
I am talking about pages like Unidentified Auror (I), Unidentified Auror (II), Unidentified Auror (X), and Unidentified Auror (IX); and with this part of the policy:
However, if the only information available about an unidentified character applies equally to other characters, such as their gender and loyalty/affiliation (e.g. "Hufflepuff girl" or "male Snatcher"), then they should be covered in a "hub" article along with all other characters matching their description.
It looked like the only info available about them applies to any of them, as in all of them. I do not think just because their actors are identified warranted them to all get individual pages, otherwise Unidentified Beauxbatons students would be several pages instead of just one.
As for the charms page; as long as the refs can be preserved I don't really mind, tbh there's barely any refs before the suspicious ones started popping up, that's why I didn't realize they were suspicious, my apologies. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 08:18, October 29, 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, just wanted to let you know, I know it looks like I've been "adding" rather than "subtracting" stuff on the charms class pages, but I actually removed around 40 spells that don't have citations and have no indications of being taught basing on the info on their respective article pages (and added refs to prove some should stay.) I'm not sure if "90% of the edits were from one user who clearly didn't have any canonical sources" is true, because I looked through the editing history, and prior to that one particular user started getting involved, the page was already poorly cited, and I think I did remove some that weren't added by the said user.
It's now trimmed down to around half of them still needing citation, because... they do need citations? There are a couple, if confident enough, could also just be removed all together (Lumos Solem and Fire-Making Spell taught in Herbology & Mending Charm and Hardening Charm taught in Transfiguration); I am not confident so I left them there, since I don't play any video games so I don't know if they were in fact taught in those versions (base on article info, unless they are lacking, it seems not.)
I think a lot of those that said "theory" or "revision" could be from the novels, but again, they don't have refs. Those were there even in the revision you recovered, and I don't think saying they need citation is uncalled for, because they lack just that. Unless it's okay to place {{References}} at the start of the Curriculum section to indicate that entire section is generally lacking needed citation, not sure how removing the {{fact}} label would be a better option when clearly people didn't realize it's something needed to be done.
(FYI, initially I did think the wording on {{References}} suggests it's also suitable to be used in situation when "there is citations around, but not nearly enough"; but I've seen the said template being removed as long as there's the "Notes and references" section added with like one ref; which was why I didn't bother with placing this template and just went straight with using {{fact}}.)
As long as there's a way of letting people know that "hey, this page needs more citations!"; I don't really care how it is done. As in, I'm not insisting on having all those {{fact}}s placed, should there be other ways to highlight the problem. I'm saying this because I don't want to be that one person to go do what's advise against doing; I understand having a bunch of {{fact}}s listing looks rather redundant, but for now, it's to show they are the ones left after being filtered but are still questionable, as opposed to previously just being possibly added by the user who did a series of problematic edits. In fact, I think I did already remove most if not all ones that are added by him/her, and as I said in the beginning, prior to those edits, citations were already lacking. That remains a problem that won't be solved by just reverting said user's edits; and it won't help if someone else choose to add most stuff without citations. I did not add any to Year 5, but yeah, basically the ones without refs all still need verifications.
I'm saying this with trepidation, because I don't want to be seen as "the stubborn editor who refused to listen;" I've listened, but I'm just making it extra clear that those remaining ones needing citations, mostly aren't the ones added by the questionable users (those, are mostly gone at this point.) I feel the need to point this out because at first glance, it may look like I did what you directly told me best not to do, which is not the case. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 19:34, October 29, 2018 (UTC)

For future references...

The next time I forget to source something, like with the Abernathy article, I would greatly appreciate it if you, rather than  instantly undoing my edit(s) as a matter of course, would it be okay if you simply gave me a head's up on my talk page that I forgot, or added a "citation needed" notice instead? Simply undoing edits for the sake of undoing edits comes across as rather provokative, even if it's unintentional. Maester Martin (talk) 21:46, October 30, 2018 (UTC)

At the very least, you have claimed as much. But that is neither here nor there. because the point I am making is that firstly, we are all faliable human beings, meaning that I can, in fact, forget something and do a mistake without it being deserving of treatment that boarders on implying I am engaging in willful sabotage, and secondly, the fact that something being unsourced does not magically turn it into speculation. With all due respect, I'd like you to remind you of the edit policy, I seem to remember somewhere it states we who edit the wiki are to look on the edits made by others with "good faith". You see, when I see an edit I don't agree with, I don't undo it by reflex lest it is vandalism. If an edit don't seem right to me, I first check canon sources to see if that edit is indeed rooted in canon, and if it isn't, then I undo it. And again, with respect, I don't find it to be too unreasonable an expectation for others to do the same in regard to my own edits. Maester Martin (talk) 23:45, October 30, 2018 (UTC)

And this restriction was imposed upon me without notifying me about its existence beforehand because? Maester Martin (talk) 00:54, October 31, 2018 (UTC)

Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery Nomination

Hello Ironyak1,

Great news-- Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery is a nominee for Google Play’s Fan Favorite Game of 2018! This award puts the power in the communities’ hands, allowing fans like you and your community members to vote for and support their favorite game. The voting for the Fan Favorite Game takes place between November 12 and November 26.

We're partnering with Google Play this year to help get out the vote, which is why we're reaching out to you. We want to help you make sure Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery has a chance of taking home the prize, since there are a lot of strong contenders this year. We have a couple of ideas on how to help with this:


  • A discussion post on your community on November 12 announcing that voting is live.

  • A blog post on the same day announcing the same.

  • A "smart" banner that will display for wiki viewers on mobile (similar to the smart banner that currently displays on mobile pages for the FANDOM app).

We're also happy to help support getting out the vote for Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery in any other way you'd like -- just let us know how we can help.

We look forward to hearing from you and don't hesitate to get back to us with any questions you may have!

Thanks,

Rrrockio (talk) 21:02, November 1, 2018 (UTC)

Canon source

Is LePoint Pop a canon source for any COG information and images? Found this article that has maps of wizarding Paris in the 1920s and advertisements from most likely the Cri de la Gargouille: https://www.lepoint.fr/pop-culture/cinema/exclusif-voici-la-carte-du-paris-magique-des-animaux-fantastiques-31-10-2018-2267643_2923.php IlvermornyWizard (talk) 22:24, November 1, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizardno

RE:FW Hogwarts Mystery Nomination

Will keep an eye out! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 02:42, November 2, 2018 (UTC)

Stopping by

Hope this won't be seen as spamming, but after reading a particular response (for people who wonder: No, I'm not telling. If you feel I may be referring to a post made by you, don't bother replying because I won't be confirming or denying; you'd best stop and think why you'd assume I'd be talking about you at all,) I need to say this: You are a saint. I don't envy you for having to put up with some of the stuff said around here. I don't have the patience, so I feel the least I could do is letting it be known that at least one person here (myself) appreciated the effort you are making on this wiki. I'm honestly really pissed with the reply I saw and I'm just thankful that it isn't my responsibility having to deal with it. Keep up the good work, I so wish there's some badge I can give you with the equivalent of "surviving a year of Umbridge's nonsense and atop of that getting an O in DADA, being able to shove it in her face." If that makes any sense.

For other people viewing this, I'm saying this because I know for sure Ironyak1 won't be the only one reading; you may wonder what the point of making an offhanded comment without actually clarifying who I'm trying to backstab is; the thing is, I am not backstabbing anyone, I'm stating the fact that I'm pissed about a comment I saw, but who wrote the comment is irrelevant. I'm not here to get them into trouble, frankly, I don't think they are worth the hassle, but it doesn't change how disturbed I felt, so the whole point is like I said, I'm just glad it's not my problem, and I'm glad Admins like Ironyak1 are around.

(Ironyak1, you are probably like "wth why are you writing to me lol", sorry; I'm just really annoyed. The conversation I'm seeing mostly give me the impression that Admins here are incompetent or something; no, it was not outright worded that way, but the atmosphere is so negative so please allow me to uninvitedly trying to balance that out, even if it's just to make myself feel better. =P)

--Sammm✦✧(talk) 07:01, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

Here, humor me, start wearing this on your robes: --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 19:39, November 4, 2018 (UTC)
Dolores Umbridge (Concept Artwork 01)
You have survived a bout of Umbridge-itis!
For diligent work in surviving a year of Umbridge's nonsense and atop of that getting an O in DADA, being able to shove it in her face.
Seth; you just made my day. =D ↑
Ironyak1; {{Real book infobox}} is protected from regular users, that's why I sent in a request for the changes to be made. xD --Sammm✦✧(talk) 20:07, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Discussion Mod permissions

Actually, Staff approached me first about it, and I thought it was a very good idea. Still, want me to ask them if it's possible to have Mods renaming categories by themselves? It's so seldom done that's it's hardly a priority, IMO, though I see why it makes sense. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 19:39, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

Admins in Discussion follow up rationale

Hey IronYak

Just dropping you a line regards a discussion I've posted on Seths wall. While I've addressed it to Seth, I believe the seniments there are universally relevant for all those involved in the recent Cosmic Chronos Admin application.

Regards

The Dark MarcSlytherincrest (talk) The Dark Marc 22:33, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

Naming images

I found images from COG on Mugglenet and don't know where to start naming them - http://www.mugglenet.com/2018/11/heroes-villains-and-beasts-galore-in-new-crimes-of-grindelwald-images/ IlvermornyWizard (talk) 19:18, November 7, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Reliable Twitter account

I found an account on Twitter that posts information and photos from The Crimes of Grindelwald, is it considered reliable enough to use on here? Here is the link: https://twitter.com/FBFilmSeries IlvermornyWizard (talk) 19:18, November 7, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Administrator Vote: Question

Hello Ironyak1, it's Harrypotterexpert101, and I am currently trying to become an administrator here. Seth reopened my vote, since I disagreed with its closer. I'm writing to you to ask you a question. So my request is posted on the Harry Potter Wiki:Requests for permissions, right? How in the world are people supposed to know to vote? I've tried to get the word out, but it's just had timing when I do it, and no one can see it. How do you suggest I get the word out? I don't want to go from talk page to talk page, telling people to come vote...

Cheers, Dave (talk) 15:31, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

List of Spells

I don't think you understood what I meant. What I proposed was to remove the tabber, and instead replace it with H2 for every letter, and keeping H3 for every spell. I'll show you in an edit. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 19:50, November 9, 2018 (UTC)

Following up!

Hello Ironyak1! 

Just wanted to follow up on the Google Play nomination for Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery for Fan Favorite Game of 2018. We will be launching the Discussion/Blog posts on Monday unless you would like to opt out, but we would love your go-ahead for the right rail image and the smart banner! It will absolutely give Hogwarts Mystery a better shot at the win. :)

Thanks! Rrrockio (talk) 21:39, November 9, 2018 (UTC)

Talk page comment mass removal

Hi there; just wondering how important the HPW:TPP should be regarded. Not quite sure how to phrase the question; I mean, a policy is a policy and should not be taken lightly regardless, but I think comparing to mainspace articles or templates, if a violation of the Talk Page Policy happens, it's less severe? I'm asking this because I almost feel silly to report this kind of violation, but because I saw them, I'm also not sure if it's right to "pretend I didn't see them", if that makes any sense.

If it isn't a big deal, you'll just be hearing from me this once. It looks like User:RainbowBubbles3 and User:AzuraKitsune both engage in removing talk page contents more than once. I've reverted the removal done to my own Talk page, but I'm not sure if it's worth reverting the talk pages belonging to the users who performed the act, since they are likely going to remove them again. Figured I'd just report this behavior, and well, if it isn't to be fussed over, will know not to mind if I see it done again.

--Sammm✦✧(talk) 02:34, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Talk Page Policy

I'm not too sure what you mean, but I haven't removed any policy from my page. The only thing I removed was a comment because there was a slight disagreement with me and another user, and I just didn't want to see it anymore, or having other users getting the wrong idea about me. I hate disagreements. I've already managed to get involved in 2, so after finishing editing the house pages, I will be gone for good. This seems like a ridiculously unnecessary rule to me. Please explain why it is compulsory to keep all messages.

This is why I hate FANDOM and want to leave sometimes.

RainbowBubbles3 (talk) 09:36, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

:Re Talk Page Policy

Oh sorry, I just posted that without thinking and later reflected I was being very rude, so I deleted it... I'll be more careful from now on

Cheers! AzuraKitsune (talk) 14:07, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for the help with references! I have been struggling for a while with trying to add those, but yet again I'm still relatively new to the Wiki. Thanks again for the help! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CadeRaid15 (talkcontribs).

Duplicate images

Can you delete File:PicsArt 11-12-05.48.06 (1).png and File:Credence Barebone-3.jpg? User:Flowertje keeps uploading duplicate images even after I warned her multiple times not to. IlvermornyWizard (talk) 18:01, November 12, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Potential policies updates?=

Hi there! Saw Ginevra Potter is now the thing; so perhaps the part about Ginny in HPW:POLICY#Naming of articles should be removed, or explained why the circumstances have changed.

HPW:POLICY#"In-universe" point of view may also benefit from slight tweaking; I supposed your bot could just be programmed to switch out long refs, but perhaps it's a good opportunity to simply also inform the users to use {{HBP}} and the likes.

HPW:LG#Infobox also seemed to be needing modifications; while it may not have always been the case, to my understanding, the sample infobox is currently actually for Users and not in-universe individuals?

On a different note; I think the last example on Help:Editing#Internal links could use a change, since "Dursley" is a redirect. It just doesn't look to be the best example, though I'm not sure how to come up with an okay sentence (I think demonstrating words like Muggle or Potion that really do have pages in singular form would be better than one that's used as a redirect;) also wasn't sure if regular users should be editing the Help pages, and since I haven't figured out a better replacement, figured I'd just bring up the issue as well. =D

--Sammm✦✧(talk) 11:17, November 13, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Just a short question

Thanks, but things aren't quite that desperate ;) Cheers. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 01:23, November 14, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Tying categories with templates

I've actually been sitting on the idea after first reading it in the forum; just to make sure I'm understanding it correctly, take {{HM}} for example, do you mean to add [[category:Articles with information from Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery]] within the <includeonly> </includeonly> part of the template, so that any pages with {{HM}} listed in the appearances section, would automatically be included in that category? I think the only thing I would register as a "problem", is super minor that I'm not even sure it's worth tweaking. It's the wording of the categories, like "Articles with information from Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery"; I'd expect to get that literally, but with the category attached to the template, I think there's a good chance the article had no information on whatever they were categorized to be having; which could be misleading if expecting to find the said info and seeing none after reading the whole article. It's a little hard to explain, sorry Dx. I think chances are, no matter how little, if there's an appearance, it should be noted somewhere within the article hence solving the "issue," just that, I don't think all pages are in that state.

Like I said, it's a super small thing lmao. Do you think reducing the category names to simply the title would help? Like instead of "Articles with information from Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery", simply just "Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery"; that way it's not claiming to have HM info in it (even if it probably should have and just haven't had). Just a thought xP (not saying it's a good one) --Sammm✦✧(talk) 02:10, November 14, 2018 (UTC)

Ahh, just discovered an option brought up in the blog post comment, so I posted in the forum. I also forgot to ask, something that's actually my primary concern and was totally forgotten (my bad;) would there be an option to not show the category? Because, I do use those templates outside main namespace articles, such as Talk pages to be clear where I'm getting the info from, like how I did in Talk:Hot chocolate and Talk: Flying (class); would those pages be unavoidably included in the category as the result? I've also seen this type of template used on Image pages, and there's already categories specifically for images.
Then again, I'm not familiar with intricate coding, so as long as the hypothetical situation above could be avoided, then I don't have any objections (though I didn't technically object the idea anyways bahaha lol) --Sammm✦✧(talk) 04:38, November 14, 2018 (UTC)
Just realized the above reply was followed closely by the message below, so wasn't sure if it was noticed. Not in dire need of reply, but just to make sure it's not missed, and am interested to hear your thoughts on Forum:Condensed spoiler notice‎‎ =D.--Sammm✦✧(talk) 06:10, November 14, 2018 (UTC)
Oh that's great to know!! =D My knowledge about magic words is limited in the sense that, I can follow everything that's listed on the page, but am not familiar enough to apply the practice if I'm not following instructions that's step-by-step laid out to me lol. (That being said, for some reason I don't think I've ever come across mw:Help:Extension:ParserFunctions, so perhaps if I ever have time to go through it, I wouldn't be as clueless as I am atm.)
Anyhow, now that the main concern is out of the way, I don't particularly think the potential solution is needed lmao. I mean, yeah I personally like images but I don't think it's worth the effort for the time being. (sorry if the suggestion is distracting; I'm like getting old and my memory sucks; would not remember it for too long if I don't document it down somewhere lol)
--Sammm✦✧(talk) 13:37, November 14, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the formatting fix. Would kill for a decent way to edit by phone.. Cheers The Dark MarcSlytherincrest (talk)


Flamel

Thank you for fixing the Flamel page. I intended "Grindelwald's revolution" to be a subsection of extended life. I'm going to watch an early German premiere of COG this evening, so I guess I will add some spoiler information later if I can.--Rodolphus (talk) 05:59, November 14, 2018 (UTC)

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