Below is an archive of my talk page from March 6, 2015‎ to January 19, 2019‎. Please do not edit it.


Hello, Sammm鯊/Archive1, and welcome to the Harry Potter Wiki (HPW). Thank you for your edit to the Bertie Bott's Every Flavour Beans page. I hope you enjoy it here and decide to stay.

Before editing, be sure to read the wiki's policies. Please sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to automatically produce your name and the current date. Be sure to verify your e-mail address in your preferences. Before attempting any major article rewrites please read the layout guide. If you have any questions, check out the policy and help pages (see here for editing help), add a question to the Community portal, view the forum or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

Cubs Fan2007 (talk) 21:16, March 6, 2015 (UTC)


Hi, xx. Yeah, I'm not currently active much on here, so I'm not really the best person to ask this sort of question here. I think either Cubs Fan 2007 or Seth Cooper would be a better bet. ProfessorTofty (talk) 04:27, October 27, 2016 (UTC)

RE:Is there any requirement for interlanguage wikis?

Sorry for not responding straightaway, with too many things happening at once lately, I must've skipped your message.

To be honest, I had never given much thought to interlanguage links, and I don't think anything of the sort has ever been discussed (that I know of; I could be wrong). So, I don't believe there are any criteria interlanguage wikis must meet to include interwiki links. Users from other wikis just pop up every now and then and add interlanguage links to articles -- that's how it works around here, at least.

There aren't specific Admins to handle image files issues. What kind of new categorisation do you have in mind? -- normally, I'd tell you to be bold, but you seem to have in mind a significant change, so perhaps that's worth discussing beforehand.

Cheers --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 01:59, November 3, 2016 (UTC)

RE:Image categories

Hello! You think you procrastinate, but I was the one who managed to reply only after a year and a half! There are no worries, you can create categories like those all you want; if there's anything wrong, someone'll let you know, it's an easy fix. Cheers! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 16:47, March 30, 2018 (UTC)

Order of Merlin: 3rd Class!

Merlin Bronze Order of Merlin (Third Class)
The Order of Merlin is awarded to you by TheSonofCharlusPotter for having over one-thousand edits on the Harry Potter Wiki.

RE:Potter's kids' page name consistency?

Hello, hello! Again, I must apologise for taking way too much time to reply. I read your message and never got round to reply, and then I just plain forgot about it. Sorry!

First, I should note I never took part in the discussion about the titles of the articles of both Lilys, back in 2016. I think (though I might be wholly incorrect) that the fundamental difference between the case of the Lilys and that of the Jameses is that both Jameses were born "James Potter" (hence the I and II) whereas the Lilys weren't born with the same name (one was born "Lily Evans", the other "Lily Potter"; having them as "Lily Potter I" and "Lily Potter II" would imply, I think, that the first had been born a Potter -- of course, this raises issues, i.e., how to explain Molly Weasley II?).

I must say that I am not very passionate about the subject, however, I too tend to dislike the current solution. These kinds things are not up for a single user to decide, and are always open for community discussion. If you're interested, I would suggest creating a new discussion over at The Wizengamot so that everyone can add their two cents. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 23:57, April 26, 2018 (UTC)


Hey. I wanted to clarify a couple of things about the energy info that you changed. I went through every clue using online walkthrough guides made by other players. They saw the same thing I saw - when there are no oranges in the picture, it's a tree trunk (or even a branch according to a couple of players) with green leaves coming out the side of it with white flowers in the middle of it. When you click on the picture, three oranges appear. In the future, rather than changing the info and putting your thoughts in the <-- parameter, it's best to put your confusion on the talk page and receive feedback on your findings from other users otherwise we might confuse readers! - Kates39 (talk) 15:28, April 28, 2018 (UTC)

I know it's such a minor thing and people will probably find the picture anyway but why else do we edit if not for the little details! I have screenshot the image before and after clicking on it and I really do think it looks like a tree stump with white flowers and green leaves. When the oranges are placed in it, the only thing which moved were the white flowers which bounced. The actual "tree" never changed shape. The oranges are being placed in something which makes the flowers bounce. If they were on a flat surface, they couldn't bounce. Perhaps we could go with what the majority observed in the walkthrough guides and put in the <-- parameter or a reference that there was an interpretation that the picture may be what you have observed? - Kates39 (talk) 17:44, April 28, 2018 (UTC)
That's okay! It's not the best picture in the world and it's probably best to talk it out. And don't worry, I never found our conversation uncomfortable or heated! It was nice to have a pleasant chat about our different interpretations. It's not often we receive a lot of new continuous information from our favourite series so everyone tends to get a bit a carried away! You should have saw me when Pottermore put new info about Ilvermorny on their website ;) - Kates39 (talk) 17:12, April 29, 2018 (UTC)

Chapter 2

Hey! Do you remember the name of Chapter 2 in Year 2? I have completely forgotten and found no luck searching for it online. Also, did McGongall offer to teach you special Transifguration lessons when you completed the Reparifarge spell? - Kates39 (talk) 19:29, May 2, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! I don't know whether the special lessons for Transfiguration option will only be offered to students who complete the spell well, rather than be told it "needs work". She praises their work and then let's them decide what to do. But there's chance she offers to help them anyway to help them improve their spell work? I don't know.
I was worried about that. It's tough to know what to put because I don't know what happens anyway or what changes are made to the story depending on player choices. I thought sneaking into the Gryffindor Common Room would be the same for every player because they are searching for clues on Ben, who will be in that House for every player anyway (I think). I thought about cutting down how much I write for each chapter because Chapter 1 for Year 2 became very long, but I don't want to begin deleting info other people might want to read.
I think the best way to find out what changes for every player will be if you go through what I write and then add editor only comments telling me what changed for you. I don't know how to keep it neutral because even then, me and you might realise things weren't the same for us. - Kates39 (talk) 20:03, May 2, 2018 (UTC)
I thought it was a reasonable deduction. The player and Rowan are searching for an object left for Ben. Ben's in Gryffindor and my game wanted me to sneak into the Gryffindor Common Room to find it (I'm in Ravenclaw). It made sense story wise. But now you have said it changed for you, the game probably randomised it so everyone could go in another House's room. Do you know who "R" turns out to be and what House they are in yet in your version of the game? Time will tell.
Are you in Hufflepuff? Perhaps the location of the object changes for each House (could be Gryffindor to Ravenclaw, Slytherin to Huffelpuff)? I thought it was reasonable that everyone would look in the same room for the same object, because choices don't define where the object will be hidden. I will amend the section of the chapter to the correct info. - Kates39 (talk) 20:53, May 2, 2018 (UTC)
Hey Samm. That’s okay, I tend to do the same and suddenly become inactive when life takes over! I kind of feel I might have went overboard with my writing up of the game. There are seven years to go through and given how much detail I have wrote, the page will be very long. I wish I had wrote a brief summary now.
When I added the Side Quests section to the Chapter section, I wondered at the time whether I should have done that. The aim was to have the Side Quests in the same section of the Chapter they took place in. But it looks out of place and kind of a mess and I agree it should have it’s own section, or even delete the mini heading and have the writing be merged with the main story.
I thought up until that point, the Side Quests were simply part of the main story and should be written alongside the main story under the Chapter heading. I never realised it was a separate thing in the same way the classes were. Then I realised they were a sub-plot.
Unfortunately I wrote up a lot of the Side Quests in the same paragraphs of the main story under every Chapter. There are only two where I gave the Side Quests their own section heading. I will have to go through every chapter I have written up and work out what belongs where.
Hope that made sense! Kind of feel I need to take a break too from writing it up and make notes in a document. Then come back in a few days with a fresh mind and sort it out. Good luck for finals week! - Kates39 (talk) 19:19, May 4, 2018 (UTC)


Hey! The idea of the table was to break up the info a bit, and make it possible for people to add more writing on what role the character actually played instead of having *, ** and ^, and repeating info. If they appear in a trivia, we could add what the trivia actually was. I was worried we will end up with one, cluttered long list, which will appear to be one long, chunky paragraph on a very long page of nothing but plain writing.

The page will become very, very long, and I am worried the layout of it will begin to look tiring to scroll through. It annoys my OCD too - I want it to look simple and professional! The other wikia's I edit on implement the "expand" button on every section for long pages, but the Harry Potter wikia never put it on pages.

I apologise if the info I put was wrong for a couple of characters. I based the info on the *, ** and ^ signs and what they meant. I remember a lot of the mentions which was why I was certain of them. The * sign was next to Myron's name before I made the table, I assumed you added it. The * sign means "mentioned as a selectable answer". Please feel free to go over those characters you think are wrong, and add a more specific explanation of the selectable answer etc. they appeared in.

I had no idea the table looked broken on Mac computers. On my computer, iPad and even phone it looks fine. And other people have edited the table since I made it and appear to have found no problems. Would you mind taking a screenshot of the problem ? I based the table wikitext from another table on the wikia. I know when editing in the source editor, it can look daunting, but there are ways to make it only show the section you want to edit. - Kates39 (talk) 10:40, May 20, 2018 (UTC)

Oh, and I forgot to mention. I was thinking of putting the characters who are only ever mentioned and never appear, in their own section. And then rather than having to put "mentioned" over and over again, table or no table, you only have to put the manner in which they were mentioned. Do you have any thoughts about the idea? I am basically trying to condense and simplify the page and break it up a bit. - Kates39 (talk) 10:42, May 20, 2018 (UTC)
I think we need to reach a compromise here, instead of worrying too much about it! I think we're both a bit confused. I have an idea. I'm not a big fan of having symbols next to character names. The table format appears to look odd on certain programmes. Do we really need an explanation of who the characters are, when people can click on their names anyway and find out who they are, and what role they played? We could use the table format you made for classes, to shorten the section and put character names. I think we're trying to go a bit overboard with the info we feel we have to write up and over-complicating the entire thing.
We could place mentioned characters in their own section, and we could enact your idea of having a page for trivia questions etc., and place a link to that main article under the "mentioned" header on the Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery page. Then we can have a page similar to the Pottermore Patronus one? Let's clean everything up a bit and simplify the section. - Kates39 (talk) 10:53, May 21, 2018 (UTC)

Order of Merlin

Thank you! I have wrote my response on the Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery talkpage. I hope my compromise will bring about an end for the character section / question debate. I think eventually these things need to be solved before we drag it out. My compromise was basically - short character descriptions for new characters, and perhaps a trivia page focusing more on the new feature friendship building from the new update which includes important trivia, and perhaps a section for the unimportant questions. I hope you enjoy your break before your next semester, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the compromise! - Kates39 (talk) 11:08, May 31, 2018 (UTC)

I have amended the character section and included very short, simple descriptions for new characters only. I don't think anything else needs to be added, when any other info will be found by clicking on the names. I wanted to add - I don't think the mentioned section should be changed.
If we create a page for trivia, then I think we should include the main article link under the mentioned heading, for a page named Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery trivia. Perhaps we could go into further detail about who was mentioned in a trivia question and who was mentioned in other ways, on that page? Let me know your thoughts, because I know you would find such a page helpful, even if I don't. - Kates39 (talk) 11:28, May 31, 2018 (UTC)
No problem! The wiki should be a collaboration between editors, and I'm glad we could do that :) Good luck in your final semester, I remember counting down the days until it was over! And creating proper sources for info sounds like a good idea. Many pages could do with them. It kind of bothers me too when I can't work out where the info came from, and whether it's even true. Anyway, let's see where the game takes us, make notes and see how everything looks at the end! - Kates39 (talk) 23:42, June 1, 2018 (UTC)

Order of Merlin: 2nd Class!

Merlin Silver Order of Merlin (Second Class)
The Order of Merlin is awarded to you by TheSonofCharlusPotter (talk) for having over two-thousand edits on the Harry Potter Wiki.

Re:For future references

No, no hurt feelings. :-)

I admit I reacted a bit rashly in removing it, but by second thought, I do not have an issue wth the "candidate for deletion" thing. I just have to prove you wrong in reasoned discussion. :P

I wasn't the placement of my article as a candidate I had a problem with, nor you correction of my misguided removal of the tag from the article, it was the use of Caps Lock in the comment that gave the impression you were angry and shouting at me. ^^' Maester Martin (talk) 10:35, June 9, 2018 (UTC)

Hey, relax mate, I'm not angry or really even that upset. I mean - sure, I was taken a bit by surprise by the caps lock thing, but you know, communication can be difficult at the best of times, and especially on the internet. Now I'm sorry for stressing you out, bud. I just meant it as a headsup to the implications of caps lock, it's not the end of the world. We're cool. ^^' Maester Martin (talk) 09:14, June 10, 2018 (UTC)

Researching in gaming?

Hello, I am currently looking at some of the playthroughs on YouTube to try and garner more information about the Artefact Room to add to the article. Also, hopefully, a half decent image of it with not too much game icons on it. Like - from a cutscene screenshoted just before the dialouge or something.  If you're not too busy, care to help me out? June 15, 2018 (UTC)Maester Martin (talk) 09:58, June 15, 2018 (UTC)

If you can help me find the necessary clips, I'll do the writing part. ^^ Maester Martin (talk) 21:43, June 17, 2018 (UTC)


No problem, I'll try to remember next time.--Rodolphus (talk) 15:53, June 18, 2018 (UTC)

For future reference...

And someone should be mindful of the manner in which they choose to phrase constructive criticism in order not to accidentially and, presumably unintentionally, come across as condescending in the future... Maester Martin (talk) 23:18, June 18, 2018 (UTC)

Though it isn't my strong suite...

Do you think my math was sound in regard to Jacob's age? (Fun fact: If he was born in 1964, he'd be a classmate of Gilderoy Lockhart. Poor Jacob. :P). Maester Martin (talk) 00:10, June 22, 2018 (UTC)


No need to apologize. :-D How far are you in the game?

The first "cryptic message", as you called it, concerns my initial reaction to when you made an edit to the article Patricia Rakepick, where your comment was; "someone needs to learn not to add so many useless and wrongly put code. and no, I have not checked who added them, so it's nothing personal. also removing same links that were already used." I merely pointed out that phrasing your reasoning in such a blunt manner can be percieved by whoever it concerns as you talking down to them. Very inadvertently on your part, I am sure, but I know wouldn't like to have a response to me worded like that, so I kind of figured I'd give you my five cents on it just in case you one day put your "thoughts to paper" in a way someone might percieve to be hurtful, without even knowing about it. I have done this in the past, so figured that we all can benefit from a reminder just to be on the safe side. 

I have an attention to detail thingy going on. Hence the math. :P

Sorry, never mind. I was planning on sending this message to another guy, and since it's late, I am tired and a bit absent-minded, I kept writing on your talk page even after I was supposed to be done. Sorry. :P Maester Martin (talk) 02:03, June 22, 2018 (UTC) 

About Rakepick:

You asked; "according to Rakepick, when? where? Please actual source". I don't need one, because its self-evident and self-explainatory. You don't graduate from Hogwarts and become Head of Magical Law Enforcement the next day, and you don't join Gringotts and immediately becomes Head Curse-Breaker, because you would have the academical qualification, but lack the experience needed in the field to do an even remotely worthwhile job. "Burnishing herself in ability and status" is not synonymous/paraphrasing how 'apparently good she is', it is paraphrasing the fact that she spent time working as a Curse-Breaker and gradually obtained the skills and experience that convinced her employers that she was worthy of being Head Curse-Breaker. And she would have had to be a good Curse-Breaker, or she wouldn't be considered for the task of being in charge of her colleagues. One mgiht call it a circle of logic. Maester Martin (talk) 00:26, June 25, 2018 (UTC)

Not sure where you want my reply since you didn't respond with a corresponding headtitle, but... 
Woah! Quite a long reply there, mate. Let's see...
  1. I agree. She said this while teaching the MC the Shield Charm. Year 4, Chapter 1.
  2. Unless you disagree that actually working in a field is a recquirement for a position of leadership in it, I fail to see the problem. But by all means, if you believe there is a better way of phrasing it, be my guest.
  3. How am I messing up the article? People don't see it in edit mode, they see it in visual mode. And in visual mode, it looks just fine. Maester Martin (talk) 01:39, June 25, 2018 (UTC)

Hello! :-D 

Not to nag, but if you could either make a little heading before a response or somehow separate responses when you write them, it would be so much easier to find them. All your replies have gotten kind of jumbled up in one place, it is kind of difficult to see where one end and another start. ^^'

  1. I agree. It was short-sighted of me to revert your edit rather than to re-add the text. I apologise. 
  2. Sorry if you found the word 'enlighten me' somehow condescending or disrespectful, I didn't mean for it to be. In what other way would you say I could phrase it that doesn't come across as unintentionally offensive?
  3. "Back to the point, why the removal? "Quickly"a and "soon"b? And we know this, how? Oh, because, she eventually got the Head position, she must be excellent at everything, and just being excellent isn't awesome enough, she must have achieved those in record time, right? I am talking utter dragon dung."

    First of - love the usage of Potteresque metaphor/expression at the end! :-D
    Second, no you're not. 

    Third: You haven't watched many of the gameplays on youtube, have you? At the end of year 3, when Dumbledore talks to the Main Character, he described her as an exceptional student of his back when his beard was a little shorter. And that is significant, my friend, because it's Dumbledore saying it. And this isn't a case of Dumbledore being courteous like when he in the fifth book told Dawlish how he was "sure you are an excellent Auror" to his face. (Not that Dawlish wasn't, he was guarding Fudge after all, but that's beside the point), because he was talking to her and was speaking of her, and there is a difference. And when arguably the most powerful, intelligent and skilled wizard alive describe someone as such, it says quite a bit about their abilities.

    Jacob's sibling goes around asking teachers about Rakepick, and Hagrid says that "even as a student, she (Rakepick) was gone from the castle for days at a time", and "she was always in trouble, but always top of her class.That means that she was always the most outstanding student in every class she took in every subject. Kind of like Hermione. She skipped whole lessons, yet still showed herself capable of visibly outshine every other student in her class in both theory and practice. Nowhere near equal to Dumbledore's abilities, but still. 
    I never said that she "because she eventually got the Head position, she must be excellent at everything", I say that she was excelled at everything she was determined to excel at because that was what those who knew her and had known her from her early years stated to be the case. And curse-breaking was something she was very passionate about, so of course she'd excel in that field in particular. I am sorry if my chose of words gave you that impression, but if you look at the abilities and skills section, every in-game indicator to the extent of her skill, which in turn makes the switness with which her competence would have been competent noticable quite self-evident, can be found there. I feel you put too much stock on the word 'speculation', mate. It's  
  4. Good. I don't like to assume things either.
  5. I don't think she's "epic beyond proportion". I find her a midly interesting but immoral figure. I simply watch the gameplay and document what can be seen and learned about her.
  6. "Why must some adverbs with no backings need to be thrown in?" They musn't. That's why I only add adverbs with some sort of substance behind them.
  7. "There's also "glaringly obvious"c; it is biased, because, to whom? To you? To other people? To me? Who is it that thinks it's glaringly obvious?" She has a bunch of articles in the newspapers and a biography dedicated to her competence. Dumbledore, as well as every other character in the game who know her by reputation and have an opinion on her ability, concur that she was the most skilled Curse-Breaker in the world. Isn't that proof enough?
  8. "Apparently someone thinks that-" and similar choices of wording does come off as a bit condescending, even if I am certain it was perfectly unintentional on your part. A better way of putting it, might be... "I think that -" or something more casual. Not trying to dictate the way you write, man, but that phrasing is - shall we say, less open for interpetation. 
  9. People have different meanings for different people. To me, for example, apparently, in this context, sounds very much like it just looks like she is good, without that being directly confirmed by her renown and position. Evidently, on the other hand, sounds a lot more firm and accurate to me, because it is implies that there is evidence to suggest she is good at her job, which there is. Like, again, her renown and position. I apologise if I have in any way stepped on your toes. I didn't mean to. I just tried to change the wording to something I felt fit the context better, I did not try to be cross with you... :-(
  10. You are right. We know little about Curse-Breakers. We know that they could be seriously injured or even killed by an old curse, but nowhere was it ever said that they had to deal with Manticores and Sphinxes guarding ancient tombs. Which, to me at least, makes sense. Nowhere in canon is it said those creatures lives for centuries upon centuries, so you know - I figured it was equally possible that one creature, they might have happened to stumble across exploring or securing a cursed area, another maybe had escaped from some sort of native Egyptian magical creature sanctuary of sorts, and when that popped up from nowhere, Rakepick charged in defense of her co-workers. I don't know, it could be either or the other. I figured it was best to treat them as separate things to be on the safe side, hence why I empashized her skill at curse-breaking.
  11. As I stated above: By all means, if you believe there is a better way of phrasing it, be my guest. As long as you don't start remove things without giving a reason, I am happy, because I sincerely believe what I added is valid. And if you disagree, it is in everyone's best interest for me to know why so that we avoid discord. ^^' Maester Martin (talk) 14:18, June 25, 2018 (UTC)
  1. You're welcome. :-)
  2. Yeah - I could also have worded myself a little better. Sorry about that. ^^'
  3. Gameplays display the snippets of information about people, places, objects and the overal plot when you have to click on things to collect stars, so that's what's relevant about them. You can see something interesting in the game and move on, but with gameplays, you can pause the video and systematically gather information for the wikia. Also, my "third" argument was about my reasoning for using "glaringly obvious" in the first place. That being said; 
  4. Don't know how to reply to your points from 4-6, so I'll reply to number seven here: Thanks, I weren't unhappy with my last revision either. ^^
  5. On 11, I simply meant that if you feel something I write is incorrect or overdone, if you would notify me of your thought process, it'd benefit me very much. When I make edits, I have usually spent a great deal of thinking beforehand, so when someone remvoes something I did without explaining to me where they're coming from, because my logic seems sound to me when I add it, and I wouild rather have a second opinion prior to an edit than an edit of my added content I don't understand. If that makes sense? Maester Martin (talk) 21:49, June 30, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Gringotts Head Goblin (title)

Thanks for the heads-up! Yes, I quite agree with you; I've made the appropriate edits on Head Goblin (title). Cheers! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:24, July 4, 2018 (UTC)

Also, oops, just noticed you'd left me another message earlier! This image is just an in-game screenshot I believe I nicked from a Youtube playthrough (I still haven't gotten round to play Hogwarts Mystery, I'm afraid!). Personally, I'd rather keep the image instead of uploading a cropped version of this because the crop would probably end up being too tight. This wouldn't stop us, however, from uploading another in-game screenshot in which all the characters' eyes were open, of course (though, to be honest, at the size the image is displayed in most articles, I don't think that's something that takes that much away from the picture to begin with). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:39, July 4, 2018 (UTC)
The "(title)" bit was to disambiguate from Gringotts Head Goblin, a character that doesn't go by any other name.
About your blog post, I promise I'll pay closer attention to it when I have more time -- I've skimmed through it, and you raise attention to some valid issues. Cheers! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:12, July 4, 2018 (UTC)

Oh, right! I completely forgot about the letter from Dumbledore. Turns out you guys were in the right, and I was in the wrong, then. I'd still argue that Bogrod was retconned as Head Goblin, though. Or maybe a recast and greatly altered version of the goblin form the first movie after all. Maybe Davis figured it'd look too obvious playing two different characters or something, and rather than trying to make the goblin look or sound similar, they just headed the opposite route. Kind of like how Professor Flitwick in the third movie and onward looked about forty to fifty years younger than he did in Harry's second year. Maester Martin (talk) 00:32, July 5, 2018 (UTC)

Your blog

Hiya! Just popping up to say I've taken care of some of the very valid issues you raise in User blog:Sammm鯊/Questions anticipating answers (Admins, really need your pointers!) -- left you further explanations on the blog post. Thanks for bringing those to our attention! Cheers, --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 23:45, August 22, 2018 (UTC)

On second thought...

Can the two of us come to some sort of arrangement? Maester Martin (talk) 14:32, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I have no idea just happened. I edited my comment here literally seconds after I posted it, and I know I posted the edit. Here's the thing: I have gone through x amounts of gameplays, often watched three to four different walkthroughs to make sure I catch every single mention of and action done and every line said by Patricia Rakepick. I just overcame a writer's block working on this thing. So the "arrangement" referred to is one where you look at gameplays to find references and add them, and I will provide you with whatever I remember by memory too, and I stick to the whole recording biography thing. It's what I'm good at, and I just don't have the energy to keep re-watching everything I had to watch just to get this far just because you aren't happy with the number of references. Oh, also, I've emailed one of the people working at JamCity whom I discussed issues I had playing the game with. I asked if a "screenplay" of Year 4 was obtainable, and if they agree to send one, that should make it much easier. Maester Martin (talk) 15:53, August 28, 2018 (UTC)


The "Please don't remove biographical info I record from the game in chronological order without proper justification"; wasn't aimed at you at all.. Another editor butchered my paragraphs by cutting them in half, keeping the info about where Rakepick was at a given time in the story but largely removed everything regarding what she said and did.  "you still have the auto-undo reflex". Yes - I have. You or someone else tampered with the sizes of the images, it messed up the setup of my paragraphs in the biography section. Unfortunately, undoing your edit just so happened to be the easiest solution to that problem. The article, like the game itself, is still in development. We don't even have any gurantee there will be no changes to Year 4 whatsoever by the time the game is done, so we needn't be so hasty.

What consequences does this "junk to the page" get as a whole? In what way is it disadvantageous or even visible outside of source mode?

Strictly speaking, we could simply have a repeat of a single reference denoting the material as having the game as a source, and it wouldn't be incorrect. Maester Martin (talk) 16:03, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Helpful editor insisting on removing "citation needed" template

You are quite right. {{fact}} is indeed not only being properly used, and increasingly necessary as the article is expanded. Though this issue seems to stem from a lack of communication I am leaving Maester Martin a note on his talk page. Cheers! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 17:48, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

Formatting issues[1]

First of all, thank you very much for your condolences, it's appreciated

Secondly, so - just to be clear - in the simplest possible terms. references are supposed to be like this.[1] and not this[1]. , and plurals, if you go wands, the whole word is included in the link? Because I have seen, if we pretend bold is a link, that they can look like; wands, and that's why I try to correct it, it looks sloppy. Maester Martin (talk) 02:17, September 4, 2018 (UTC)

There has been several instances in various "magical abilities and skills" sections where it has been for example '[[Potion]']s, so I do the reformatting thing on instict. Are you saying that [[Potions]s will look like Potions when published? Maester Martin (talk) 02:42, September 4, 2018 (UTC)

What I want, my friend, is that when the word Potions is linked to the "Potion" article, for example, I don't want to see the six first letters linking to the article and the last 's' being normal text. And I've seen stuff like that several places. Maester Martin (talk) 11:09, September 4, 2018 (UTC)

Red cloak figure in Year 5 Ch 1.

The red cloaked figure who attacked Jacob's sibling twice in Year 4 as revealed to be Ben Copper. In Year 5 chapter 1, both Jacob's sibling and Ben Copper were attacked by a red cloaked figure at the same time. This is a different individual altogether. The cutscene clearly shows this.StargateFanBB (talk) 23:03, September 6, 2018 (UTC)

No worries. You're right. I didn't actually put a citation in when I made the page for the character. I haven't actually learned how to properly do that yet.StargateFanBB (talk) 01:35, September 9, 2018 (UTC)

"I can be condescending too"...

First off, I fail to see why being condescending in any shape or form should be a goal - secondly, Ismelda did not appear in the sorting ceremony in year 1 either. I daresay several characters in our year appear throughout the game without being seen or mentioned until we meet them for plot-reasons, the NPCs in class that are actually named notwithstanding. Maester Martin (talk) 18:34, September 8, 2018 (UTC)

Citation or nay, your argument that Diego Caplan cannot be a fifth year because you were in the same house and didn't see him at the sorting is still invalidated by the existence of Ismelda Murk. That being said, I seem to remember the houses of friends, even potential friends you have yet to meet in the game, has their house and year listed on the firends' list. Maybe that was why they thought it wasn't necessary? Have you asked him/her about it? Maester Martin (talk) 19:42, September 8, 2018 (UTC)

When you say; "this article lacks proper citation", and then go on to say; "I am in the same house, and he wasn't at the ceremony", I, for one, would say that the two does very much look like two separate issues. And I rejected the latter statement, because your choice of words implied that msking an appearance at the sorting ceremony was a recquirement for them to be in the same year. Which I rejected because, in the context of the game, it isn't. If did not say your statement was false, I pointed out that it was incorrect, which are two different things. 

That being said, it would appear Rodolphus broguht you the context already. Maester Martin (talk) 20:18, September 8, 2018 (UTC)

Wow, you really like hammering down stuff, don't you? :P FIne, case closed. Maester Martin (talk) 22:37, September 8, 2018 (UTC)


Why exactly do we need the citations for the three new friends again saying that they were sorted in 1984 and are whatever house they're again? If you look in Friends thing, we can see that they're Year 5 and whatever house they were sorted in. We don't need a chapter, event, quest, and etc. to determine that. IlvermornyWizard (talk) 05:18, September 9, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Could you lend me a hand? ^^'

Hello there, Sammm. So - Seth posted on my talk page an instruction for the proper inclusion of images to articles, giving me some kind of template. I tried to ask him if he could explain it a little better, but it seems like real life have caught up wth him a little. Could you look it over for me, please, and help me understand how it's done? Maester Martin (talk) 06:22, September 11, 2018 (UTC)

I am not at all familiar with it to be honest. :P

Thanks, I'll look at it. If you look at my replies at Seth's page, you might understand my confusion a little better. 07:12, September 11, 2018 (UTC)Maester Martin (talk)

The problem is that I viewed Rakepick's article in source mode and could not find the template in question among the codes. Maester Martin (talk) 14:42, September 11, 2018 (UTC)

Understandable. I won't hold a grudge for having to wait a little between responses. ;-)

  1. Why were you viewing Rakepick's article in source mode?
    Well, Sammm, in source mode, you can see the infobox template, among other things. I figured that if you can see that, you would be able to see the desired image template. Also - the image we discussed was one I added to it, if Seth added an image template to picture I uploaded, it seemed logical that it would be there.
  2. Did you look at the link I very specifically give you to look over?
    That I did. On that page, it said "image appearing in "Patricia Rakepick" - so I ventured there to see whatever alterations Seth had done to the code of the image I added to the page in regard to this "template" he wanted, And - I found none.
  3. To clarify things, you shouldn't be looking at any ARTICLE's source mode, but an IMAGE PAGE's source mode.
    Oh, I see, so all images are designated their own pages, just like the character(s) are deleagated articles? No wonder I didn't find anything on Rakepick's page. I mistook the edit of my image/the template he made as a sort of visual byporiduct of changes done to the coding/in source mode to the file I uploaded. Sort of like an added template that wasn't visible in the article itself, but popped up when when you clicked on it. 23:59, September 11, 2018 (UTC)Maester Martin (talk)

RE:Class icons from Hogwarts Mystery

Hi Sam! Nice to meet you!

First of all, thanks for ask me about my image. I know how it feels that other people do that. I must say that we do that in the spanish wiki in order to hace a more completely web page, but don't worry, I currently add the source of the image of where it has been taken an the author of the image. 

Secondly, if you have the game on your phone, you can look for it in your phone's files. When I do that, I have to go to: My files / My device / Android / Data / then I go till the last files and push the one called "com.tinyco.potter" / files / and finally you look for all the icons that you want. If you have any problem, or you need help, don't hesitate about ask me.

Have a nice day!

LeFences (Leandro) (talk) 01:17, September 22, 2018 (UTC)

Pd: I've already replaced the image. ;)

  • You're welcome! ;). Sadly for me too, I don't have an IPhone (I'm from Argentina friend xD) but I have a Puerto Rican friend that play the game and we have a facebook group too. He knows a lot about image programes  and image edition, so he must know about  it. I'll reply as soon as I can. Regards, LeFences (Leandro) (talk) 01:44, September 22, 2018 (UTC)
  • I have his answer. His method consists in play the game in his computer and use their files, but I now that is a loooot of work to do. So, if you want, you are free to use our images from our wiki, just don't forget of writing down the corresponding interwiki code and the author (me) or the source where ir was taken from. The interwiki code is useful for us to do not reupload the same image twice, and it is useful to go from one image to another faster. If you need anything more, ask me. I'll be happy do it.LeFences (Leandro) (talk) 02:22, September 22, 2018 (UTC) 
  • I'm not sure at all,because I take the images from my phone as I said before, but there are videos in YouTube explaining how to install the game, maybe you can find a suitable route of game's installation. Now new images are coming from the new actualization of the game, so I'll upload them when I have the next chapter free. (I already have the images, but I would rather wait till the next chapter begins in order to gather information). The images don't need any alteration,they are ready to use. Also I know we have our wiki without some things, but sice a lot of time we have working to clean it up and make it as complete as we can. I hope to have helped you. If you need specific images, ask me, and I'll upload them here.LeFences (Leandro) (talk) 18:27, September 23, 2018 (UTC)
    • Hi again! I've already uploaded the images in our wiki, so you can donwload them and reupload with the suitable information. If you need more images, ask me :) LeFences (Leandro) (talk) 23:45, September 24, 2018 (UTC)

Duplicate images

Hello Sammm! My apologies for your need to contact Starstuff about the duplicate image issue. It does indeed appear as if my communications today are being taken the wrong way. I also did not see you message because Ironyak responded after you -- I saw his message but not yours. Again, I apologise for seemingly ignoring you. You are correct in the fact that the images should be deleted; my response was more about the immediate need to remove them rather since there were more pressing things I needed to do at the time. If Starstuff does not get around to deleting them, I will do so within a couple of hours when I have more time. Again, I apologise for your need to go to another admin on this issue - Cavalier OneGryffindorcrest(Wizarding Wireless Network) 20:16, September 25, 2018 (UTC)

No problems! Happy to clear up the issue. It certainly was more about the priority -- with the new trailer dropping, the entire Nagini reveal; this was the much more pressing issue. At that point, deleting some images certainly isn't as high a priority compared to other tasks. In my mind, content always comes before maintenance. The issue would have been rectified at some point, but once all the excitement surrounding the trailer had died down. - Cavalier OneGryffindorcrest(Wizarding Wireless Network) 17:23, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

RE Bot help?

Sorry, just getting caught up with messages. Yes, the bot can update "[[Quidditch]] team" to "[[Quidditch team]]". I'll add it to the list of similar link fixes and the change will propagate through out the site during the next few runs of the bot. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 16:54, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

So when I spot checked the pages involved with this change, many of them were like Moose Jaw Meteorites where there is a single use of the term. As such, a link to the major topic Quidditch takes priority over Quidditch team, so the second linked was piped. As you pointed out there are other cases where Quidditch is linked independently so the change will need to take this into account to make the update more ideal. If you have a quick example page, that would help. Oh, and no need to worry about raising the issue - rather get the feedback and make the adjustments for the next bot run. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 02:02, September 28, 2018 (UTC)

RE:COS official videos... with Japanese subtitles...

Not very old news, but it's a featurette that has been released about a month ago: you can watch it here. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 17:30, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

They're fine if you use them as references, but it stretches reasonability a bit to upload them straight here in full (it would be probably be in breach of fair use). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 18:18, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Hogwarts Mystery templates

Thanks for the info - I had looked at the History for HMy5 so contacted PetStarPlanet, but can see now you got the ball rolling on all this. In helping establish all the current short-link templates, I found that encoding by position is much easier than using parameter names. That is, instead of having to say PS|type=book|chapter=1 you just say PS|B|1 (first parameter is media type, second is chapter (or music track, or game level, etc, depending on the media type)).

As such, the HM template could drop all the ch/sq params and just focus on the values:

  • HM|1|1 = Hogwarts Mystery: Year 1, Chapter 1 (Your Journey Begins)
  • HM|1|Afraid to Fly = Hogwarts Mystery: Year 1, Side Quest - Afraid to Fly (if it's not a chapter number it has to be a side quest right?)
  • HM|1|2|p = Hogwarts Mystery: Year 1, Chapter 2 (Welcome To Hogwarts), Potions Lesson - Cure for Boils Potion (there is only one potions lesson for chapter 2 so no need to re-specify the chapter number in the parameter info)

I hope this make sense. Broken into blocks this way it should be easy to merge into the current HM template and expand as needed in the future (just another switch statement to copy & modify). Please let me know if there are any questions or thoughts on this as I'll probably start making a test version of these modifications later in the week. It's nice to see people working on advanced templating to help standardize references! I'm just looking to refine and improve if possible. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:20, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

Yes that is doable, as the p comes after the chapter, you just add the switch statement there instead of at the higher level. Basically the logic is: if chapter == 2 then p = "Potions Lesson - Calming Draught", if chapter == 5 then p = "Potions Lesson - Shrinking Solution".
Currently, the templates allow users to make some odd mixes like HMy4|ch|1|5p where the chapter and lesson don't agree as the lesson check is not dependent on the chapter value. As much as possible you want to avoid allowing these types of contradictory arrangements - it's all just a matter of how the switch statements are nested. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:48, September 26, 2018 (UTC)
I kludged together HMtest if you want to see how this could be structured. There are some redundancies in the markup (in order to handle either Chapter or Side Quest as parameter 2), but it's pretty clear and easy to read & expand IMHO. See how the switch {{{3}}} statements are placed after the {{{2}}} value checks so they are only tested based on the particular value given there. Probably need to add some extra if statements to handle blank parameters, but this hopefully gives you some ideas. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 20:10, September 26, 2018 (UTC)
I've found templates with parameters to be a balancing act between brevity, usability, and maintainability. Expecting users to figure out and remember parameter names (is chapter c?, or ch?, or chap?, etc) I found to be less usable than just letting them provide a number (even if the template needs to sort through more info after the fact). Similarly, while Chapter and the markup text gets repeated in HMtest, it is a copy & paste job once for each year & just change the chapter titles (which anyone can do). If you want a challenge you could try and test if the second parameter given is a number (try an expression on it and catch the error) and then based on that result choose if the "Chapter" text should be added or not. It's doable, but tricky to get right and ultimately to maintain. More a programming style issue than being a better or worse solution as each have their pros and cons.
As for PM, the parameter passed is the exact article link name from & it came about after they dropped the old site and broke every Pottermore link we had. As such it has been built one article at a time as the mappings were re-established. As some of them map into Writings by JKR and others into Explore the Story, there is no easy way to avoid adding this info back on each link other than to expect the end user to know where it is found and provide the correct parameter (which limits usability). Template code is all hidden to end users so no reason to try and minimize that text there at the expense of usability or readability by editors (i.e. there is little value in PM|1 or PM|W|MalfoyFamily (or was it PM|E|TheMalfoys or just PM|Malfoys? etc) versus PM|the-malfoy-family which makes the content clear, simple, and can be derived directly from
As time allows, I will start to merge in the HMyX templates info into HM. When this is done and tested, then the bot can go through and do the translations such as HMy1|ch|5|5p >> HM|1|5|p sometime in the next few weeks. Please let me know if you have other thoughts or ideas in the meantime. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 21:18, September 26, 2018 (UTC)
I took a look at Template:Education and left some comments - nice update overall! The Quidditch team template needs more attention IMHO - when adding in "Unknown", the spacing is poor and makes it hard to tell if it applies to the text above or below it. Needs a larger overhaul methinks. As for PM, my goal was just to explain the history of how it came to be, not to insist it must be done that way. As you are one of very few contributors to show an interest in these advanced templates, any suggestions you have for improvements are welcomed, whenever you have the time and inclination.
As some of my immediate family does the "OCD" thing, I can understand the intense focus on some of the details. The trick seems to be how to work with it, while not letting it run the show. I appreciate the heads-up, but I'm sure most people here are plenty understanding. As you said, HP is all about sharing the love :) Have to hop soon - cheers for now --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:12, September 27, 2018 (UTC)
My only additional thought on {{Education}} is that the thin lines should extend across the entire row including the row title. Otherwise there is a tendency to read down the list on the left items separate from the related items on the right - the borders help separate that list and guide the eye.
As for {{Quidditch team}} perhaps just a dash for Unknown persons would work for now? Unfortunately it's a jumbled layout and adding a bunch more text just makes it more so IMHO. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 02:19, September 28, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Plural as titles

Apologies, you must've nearly missed me.

Articles should, as a general rule, yes, be titled in the singular (I bet those two are called that because they were, at one point in the past, called "List of creatures" and "List of Chocolate Frog Cards") -- but it would be quite proper to move them to the singular. Well spotted.

What you mean about real-world Chocolate Frog Cards is under Famous Witches and Wizards Cards, I think. It would be neat to expand that page to include all design variations and whatnot. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 20:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

Oh, that's a very good idea. I can't think of a reason not to create such a page. (btw, check out Creature and Chocolate Frog Card :) ) --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:35, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
I'm a bit concerned if the goal is to move the cards from Chocolate Frog Card as opposed to copying them over. All variations of in universe Famous Witches and Wizards Cards are also Chocolate Frog Cards by definition. As for real world Chocolate Frog cards, those by Wizards of the Coast are considered 1st tier canon (from HP Lexicon's discussion with the company), but there are several other iterations made by Hasbro, or Jelly Belly, or released exclusively in the UK or Australia which vary from using art from the HP trading card games, new drawings, or even film images. The point being is that the full collection of real world Chocolate Frog cards is vast and there is some overlap with our in-universe Chocolate Frog Cards so this is not a simple reorganization to undertake. See ibid's analysis for some more info which I discussed with them at length while reorganizing our article. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 01:36, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

RE Chocolate Frog Cards

Sorry, I must have misunderstood the conversation. It sounded like there was an intent to edit Chocolate Frog Card in order to reduce the variations listed there and/or develop a Chocolate Frog Cards (real-world), which would require many more new cards to be accounted for (which are mostly just new art). The real-world list of cards has value (much as the related Harry Potter Trading Card Game lists do, but is a substantial undertaking. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 03:24, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

Hogwarts Mystery friend images

How did you get the transparent background friendship images from Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery? And since Jae Kim is now an available friend, would it be possible to get one for him now? PetStarPlanet (talk) 13:16, October 7, 2018 (UTC)

RE:When a "Hogwarts" specific article is needed


I think you'll find that, most of the time, if something obvious doesn't exist is just because no one took the time to go through with it and make it. There's no hard-and-fast criteria for having a "Hogwarts-specific" article: if there's information enough to warrant it, go ahead and do it! ("Headmaster of Hogwarts" is definitely worth its own article -- Headmaster could remain as a "hub" article for information on Headmasters of all schools). I also quite agree Hogwarts Quidditch Captain, should go back to "Quidditch Captain"; there's nothing extraordinary about the ones at Hogwarts to merit their own article. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:51, October 14, 2018 (UTC)

A good thing to have in mind is: Be bold! No one will assume you're acting in bad faith right off the bat: if, for some reason, what you're doing isn't the right thing, someone will eventually explain to you what you're doing wrong, and any "damage" (for lack of a better word) is easily reverted. (The exception is, of course, major changes to many or major articles: those might require some feedback first.) So, no need to be nervous -- that's what the rest of us are here for!
If you think "British Ministry of Magic visitor's entrance" could make a decent, independent, article, go ahead and do it! ;) --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 23:47, October 14, 2018 (UTC)

RE 2014 QWC

A navbox makes a lot of sense for those articles (which Seth made last minute copies from the old Pottermore right before it shut down. Pottermore only recently restored them so for the intervening years, the articles here were one of the few sources for that info). {{Succession box}} might be a good place to start, or {{Minister for Magic}} would be another approach if you want to display the list of articles, or you could come up with something novel. Have at it! Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 17:42, October 16, 2018 (UTC)

Long overdue

Merlin Gold Order of Merlin (First Class)
The Order of Merlin is awarded to you by  Seth Cooper  owl post! for having over three-thousand edits on the Harry Potter Wiki.


 Seth Cooper  has awarded you a Prefect Badge!
For outstanding proactiveness and constant efforts to improve the Wiki.

These are well-deserved. Cheers, and keep up the good work! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:26, October 16, 2018 (UTC)

RE Quidditch Chocolate Frog Card

Yeah, those chocolate frog mixups... The trouble is that both sources are at the same third-tier canon, so technically the names from the HBP DS game would be used as it is the newest source, but QWC was such a more complete and thorough treatment of the material that it is more likely to be correct compared to the poor quality DS game where the chocolate frog cards were an afterthought. In short, nothing was ever done as there isn't a clear way to resolve it. Thoughts? --Ironyak1 (talk) 16:43, October 19, 2018 (UTC)


Sorry, I missed your message. If I can still help, drop me a message whenever you're available. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 10:49, October 20, 2018 (UTC)

I'm in Greenwich Mean Time (so that's UTC), Western Europe. It's midday on my end, but you probably don't want to talk right now, that's ok -- sleep well! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 11:04, October 20, 2018 (UTC)

Question - Did I remove a comment on the Jacob's sibling Talk Page? 

If so that was not my intention. All I put on there was my opinion underneath the poster's own comment with my signature after. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by StargateFanBB (talkcontribs) October 21, 2018.

Mr. Lee's unifrom

Cecil Lee wear a police-like uniform . your English is better than mine, how would you describe it in words? I figured we could add it to the WCU article. Maester Martin (talk) 15:17, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome! :-)

And thanks anyway. ^^ Maester Martin (talk) 19:24, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

About my edits

Hey! I couldn't help but notice what you wrote about me, I apologize first of all for that, as I understand that the message was supposed to be private. I understand as well your points about my edits, you brought up good examples on my bad editing, however I just want to make it known that I did those edits because I thought they would help. I especially understand the trouble with renaming Astronomy to Astronomy (class), just for name's sake. As you pointed out, it changed all the links to incorrect ones, I didn't realize at the time that it wasn't called Astronomy (class) like the other subjects because they had counter-parts that they could be confused with. I apologize for that. The changing of the unidentified teacher was just stupid of me, looking back at it it seems just useless to change the name, but once again I did it because I thought it could help, no wonder it didn't however... Then there's the creation of the unidentified witch..... You get the deal. I'll reread the wiki policy on editing, to try and become better at it. After all my primary focus is the discussions. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 18:29, October 24, 2018 (UTC)

RE Bot Request #2

Yeah, been busy with a variety of issues. Unfortunately, setting up the bot to change the categories for those 16 pages would take longer than just editing them by hand. Ideally, you can fix your script as that would likely help with other potential future projects as well. Either way I'm sure you'll get it sorted.

Thanks for raising your concerns, but the better place is at Requests for Permissions so it is part of the related conversation.

PS Astronomy should be a redirect for now as there is no other content for which you may looking for. As the naming scheme ultimately, it could be handled either way - just depends if someone is going to make a general Astronomy page or not. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 19:09, October 24, 2018 (UTC)

RE Notability

If you look at HPW:NG - "Real people: Anyone associated with the production of an official Harry Potter release — including the novels and their companion books, the films, and the video games — is considered notable and may have a separate article." As such, all named actors with identified roles clearly qualify. ETA: For their characters - "An unidentified character can have a separate article if there is unique, specific information available that can be used to distinguish them from other characters in the title of their article." As such the titles need to be made more specific to distinguish them but as the officer in question has lines, this could be done pretty easily (and looks like Seth already did).

Also, I am going to merge your minor references into the deeply reverted Charms (class) version. When 90% of the edits were from one user who clearly didn't have any canonical sources, merely marking them as with {{fact}} is insufficient as nearly every item there would be tagged as suspect. Better to remove all the poor info and make sure any additions are properly referenced. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 06:09, October 29, 2018 (UTC)


Hey! Hope your doing okay too :) Yes, I am from the UK so I should be able to help you out. In the UK, anything that is not part of the curriculum (i.e. a subject) is just an extra-curricular activity (a club activity basically). When I was at school, everyone would say it was a club (we would never say a subject). You don't get extra credit or anything from doing them, you just want to be in a club for fun. I have always understood these extra-curriculars to be a club.

And the Frog Choir and Orchestra would definitely be a club for people who simply love music and that's it. They wouldn't be defined as an actual subject, only a club (simply an extra-cirrcular). I kinda think the heading "Extra-curricular subjects" should just be "Extra-curriculars" to avoid confusion. The only subjects on offer at Hogwarts would be the main seven from the first year, and then the third year (and sixth year) electives. Everything else would be simply a club. - Kates39 (talk) 19:18, October 29, 2018 (UTC)

RE Stopping by

Thank you for the kind words - just part of being an admin some days. I was waiting to see if you got a response to some of your questions from Staff, but would just say that for {{Real book infobox}} the additions of Illustrator and Narrator would be quite helpful given all the new editions if you wanted to add them. Be bold! :) Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 19:44, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm - it's been 8 years, probably okay to unprotect {{Real book infobox}} now ;) --Ironyak1 (talk) 20:13, November 4, 2018 (UTC)


I was the person who edited the Ravenclaw page. You said there was a 'huge coding error'? Not my fault. I was trying to fix a coding error myself.

Also, please tell me what on earth 'Wikitext' is. I have been on wiki for just over a year, am an admin on eight other wikis and have never heard of wikitext before.

Please think about the wording you use when criticising others.

RainbowBubbles3 (talk) 18:26, November 7, 2018 (UTC)

The reason I haven't heard of wikitext is because I only ever use VisualEditor. However, after looking, I realise I do know of it, but don't use it on Visual and obviously forgot the name.

If I were you, I'd leave other users alone. They'll just get offended by your stand-offish nature.

RainbowBubbles3 (talk) 16:47, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

I do understand that it's not your problem. Thanks for apologising. Let's leave it at that.

Also, I added 1,637 characters.

RainbowBubbles3 (talk) 17:48, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Editing OTHER Users' User Pages

Hello, and thank you for your concern. I indeed have used the tool before, on a wiki I am an admin for. The edits on my User page is simply experimenting with user boxes. I was trying to figure them out, and had to constantly publish my page and edit it again. It was not fun. And for the edits on Ironyak1's page, I for some reason thought that was his talk page, so I was trying to award him the "Merlins Beard" award and "Order of Merlin, 1st class". And thank you so much for the thing on "Supports Seth Cooper". I was going to contact Seth to ask him if he could help me fix it. I accidentally put "User:Supports Seth Cooper" instead of "Template". I am going to fix my edits on Ironyak1s' page, then I am going to get a life.

And a note: why do you care about my activity so much? Are you trying to get me blocked? I am very confused. I am not trying to be rude or anything, I am simply curious. 

Cheers, Dave (talk) 03:34, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

I also looked through his messages, no wonder I couldn't find the Order of Merlin and Merlin s beard award ;). And thank you.

Dave (talk) 03:39, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! Hope to see you as a Content Moderator! Best of luck in all you do!

Dave (talk) 03:58, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I asked Seth to do the community messages, but I didn't know he was going to put your nomination in also xD. And yes, I will go back to editing articles. I will leave it at that. I hope to see you around!

Cheers, Dave (talk) 04:26, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

Others' Talk Pages

Why are you watching my talk page so intensly? Nobody ever told me that you can't remove other people's messages! I replied to Ironyak. That should explain everything.

And yes, I am seriously considering leaving FANDOM just because of this wiki.

RainbowBubbles3 (talk) 18:39, November 11, 2018 (UTC)

RE Potential policies updates?

Thanks for the suggestions - the policy area is in need of an update to match current practice. Once I'm done with the spoiler notice changes, I'll add your changes to some others I know are needed. --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:08, November 13, 2018 (UTC)

Categories in Short Link Templates

On a different topic, do you have thoughts on tying the "Articles with information from..." categories to their short code templates (e.g. PS, COG, HM)? This would quickly populate all the related categories, but I wanted to see if there were possible issues or uses with the current arrangement that I might be overlooking. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:08, November 13, 2018 (UTC)

You understand the idea correctly - to add categories such as Category:Articles with information from Harry Potter and the Cursed Child into their short code template such as {{CC}} so that any article which has the short code template in their Appearances or References is included in the category.
The points you raise are good (and subtle) ones to consider. I would argue that just Appearing in a source is sufficient to merit including an article in the category. One simple example is Gellert Grindelwald appearance in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (film), which is clearly noteworthy and the article belongs in Category:Articles with information from Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (film), although as you mention it should prompt a follow up to detail and reference the details of the Appearance. But on a related note, editors quite far in Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery have been adding it just to Appearances which has prompted me to hunt down the related play through and start to capture the details. As such, just an Appearance is a good start and helpful to know when a source touches on known or new canon (such as Silvanus Kettleburn's extensive role in Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery).
As for the names of the Category, the current naming is already in place (and technically applies in the narrow sense) and they work well for the bot (which is being modified to sort these Out of Universe categories all named "Articles with information from ..." separately so they appear at the end of the Category list on each article). I would say the subtle distinction your are noting is probably not worth up-ending the current naming conventions (which predate me and largely were the work of a super skilled Admin & B-crat), although I could see tasking the bot with tagging articles that have an Appearance but not a related Ref for a source to help find articles that need more information. Hope that all made sense & thanks for the input! Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 04:08, November 14, 2018 (UTC)
There's a detail I was missing - nice catch! There was something troubling me about this approach that I couldn't put my finger on so I really appreciate the extra review. I also use the shortcode templates on Talk pages all the time as a convenience and yes they would get included in the category inadvertently. Thankfully, there is a {{NAMESPACE}} magic word that you can check to only add the category if it is the main namespace (learned something new :)
I saw both the blog post and your feedback about possible solutions to the editing notices. I think that there will need to be quite a bit of discussion and options tested to figure out the best approach, but do not have the free cycles to tackle it currently. However, I will follow up once the current tasks are resolved (the spoiler notice removal has many thousands of pages effected that I am reviewing as it is a new chunk of code for the bot). FYI the bot does use the specific spoiler notice if there is only one needed, and only switches to the condensed notice currently when both HM and COG apply, which was a good idea (even if quite a bit more tricky to code for ;) Thanks again! --Ironyak1 (talk) 06:22, November 14, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Ginny

That's actually an interesting point, and it never occurred to me before. But if memory of the vote serves, the consensus was to use the surname used throughout the series. Under the section you cite, the given examples are to use Ginevra Weasley and Molly Weasley instead of Ginevra Potter and Molly Prewett. I'll tweak the policy. --Cubs Fan (Talk to me) 02:31, November 15, 2018 (UTC)


On the Orchideous page you reverted my edit removing the italic style for Herbifors, it confused me, so I checked the policies, couldn't find anything about it... The only logical reason that I can see it to be italic is that it is written as the incantation of the spell, but I'm not sure if that's the case as Herbivicus Charm isn't written as "Herbivicus" (that's the given incantation of the spell). Could you clear this up for me? Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 16:23, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

No worries! I was just confused by the change. Cheers, CosmicChronos Talk to me Contribs 16:51, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

Late reply

Hi Sammm! Sorry for the very late reply, bit of a hectic last few weeks here. As for statistics on dev tools, I'm afraid the answer is I don't really know. It's something I can definitely ask around about, but I don't usually have much to do with the dev scripts. It is an interesting notion however, to see if the flow to actually checking references changes if the refs are instantly clickable rather than a separate click away. This information would probably be of interest to more than just you, so I'm going to pass that on to our more technically minded Staff to see if we have an answer or can get one for you.

As for the Administrator issue – as far as I know, being an Administrator would not affect the way they do their job in any significant way. Discussions Moderators on HPW have the ability to block problem users, which is not enabled on a lot of wikis so here they have extra tools. Being an administrator only really serves the purpose of being able to promote other Discussions Moderators without the need to call Bureaucrats/Administrators to do it for them. Being an administrator would not give them any extra rights or change the way they moderate Discussions.

I will take a look at the Real book infobox matter myself. I pretty much built all the infoboxes originally, and adding a few more fields won't be that alarming I think. It's a generally good idea to give credit where credit is due. - Cavalier OneGryffindorcrest(Wizarding Wireless Network) 19:01, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

Niffler plush images

The images of the Niffler plush is much better suited for that page. The Niffler page is supposed to be about the Niffler and have images of the Niffler not of a plush. I know it's under Merchandise, but still. IlvermornyWizard (talk) 04:28, November 21, 2018 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

RE:Parisian Diagon Alley

Point taken ;) --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 01:12, December 13, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Aragog's Lair + Blog post in main namespace

Sorry about that -- whenever I don't reply just assume I overlooked your message due to some other messages getting in the way and feel free to bump; in fact, I hadn't even seen those two messages you sent me.

To be fair, the Blog namespace sees very seldom significant use and I understand why Ironyak went ahead and just deleted those. If you insist, I can restore them, but do you think it would be worth the trouble (honest question)?

As for Aragog's Lair, I take it both names are acceptable (both come from tier 3 canon). I prefer the one we have now, but you can change it if you want. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 02:05, December 18, 2018 (UTC)

I think it's a safe assumption both are the same, yes; a redirect would be adequate. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 01:25, December 22, 2018 (UTC)

Content Mod

Per your successful request at RFP, you have now been granted Content Moderator rights. To quote Professor Dumbledore: "Use it well. A Very Merry Christmas to you." Cheers! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 01:25, December 22, 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations, Sammm鯊! Hopefully not too much work. ;-)  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 16:25, December 22, 2018 (UTC)

Suggesting an edit

I can't edit the home page but you probably can (I mean your a content mod) 
Screen Shot 2018-12-24 at 5.07.27 PM
Screen Shot 2018-12-24 at 5.07.22 PM

I just thought this text was too hard to read and I think its color should be changed, okay, thanks! Have a Merry Christmas

Loltol1234 (talk) 01:13, December 25, 2018 (UTC)Loltol1234

Harry Potter Wiki:Canon

Hi Sammm鯊, the short codes are no problem but why have you changed from Harry Potter Wiki:About to Harry Potter Wiki? That are two different pages.

I have also a plead. Can you put our German interwiki link on this page as: "de2:Harry-Potter-Lexikon:Kanon"? Thank you.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 19:40, December 30, 2018 (UTC)

Ah, now I understand. Thank you for explaining and for setting the link.  Harry granger   Talk   contribs 22:18, December 30, 2018 (UTC)

RE When to include "the" in names

Hi - my guess would be that it is because the HP books use "the Daily Prophet" (see Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Chapters 5,6,8, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets Chapters 4, 12, etc, etc...) and "The Quibbler" (Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Chapters 7, 10, etc), whereas The New York Ghost is given as such in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them: The Original Screenplay and the magazine titles are based on the film prop covers. In short, it's whether the highest canon source uses "the" in the given full title. Hope that helps - Happy New Year! --Ironyak1 (talk) 19:59, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

Yes - that is correct. While not likely, some of the publications have been given by name in both Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them: The Original Screenplay and Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald - The Original Screenplay, so it is always possible that exact names may be provided in the future. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 21:14, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Verifying proper procedure

I'd say .png files are preferred (I certainly prefer them, at any rate), but not mandatory. Not that I know much about it, but .jpg somewhat reduces file sizes by using lossy compression which somewhat degrades image quality (not dramatically so, but still noticeable -- hence they "turn out quite crappy looking", as you rightly put it). That said, there doesn't seem to be much advantage in converting every single upload to .png because we'd be going from an already lossy format to lossless — so my approach is to upload new .png versions of old .jpg files only if there's some reason to (the new one is higher quality, larger, clearer, etc., or if it's to harmonize a batch of files).

Changing file names to more recognisable ones is always acceptable; the ones you pointed out would be textbook examples. Swapping lower quality dupes on User pages is also acceptable, but make sure to point out what you're doing on the edit summary to avoid misunderstandings (something among the lines of "Content Mod: replacing duplicate picture"). Also, relax, no one is going to block you for doing something wrong without pointing it out to you first ;)

Happy holidays! Hope you did ok on your finals (mine are just around the corner!) --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 20:10, January 1, 2019 (UTC)

And you're quite right, you were overlooked. Go ahead and create a forum thread. As for you not being able to edit blog posts -- I didn't know that. If you do restore the deleted articles, just leave the links on my (or any other active admin) and we'll take care of it. Sorry for the short reply, but I was about to turn in. See you tomorrow! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 04:25, January 3, 2019 (UTC)
All moves Yes check Done. And yes, I did know that, but old habits die hard ;) --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 09:23, January 3, 2019 (UTC)
That second picture of Harry is from Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (film), the first one of Ginny is a bit harder to identify but I'd say it's from Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (film). I identify them by the similar background and pose found in other promotional pictures that are definitely from COS and from POA.
The GIF categories are perfectly alright, I think, as are the other categories you proposed. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 18:26, January 9, 2019 (UTC)

RE Bot and individual old spoiler headers

Hey - so {{FBCasesSpoiler}} is being deprecated as the game has been out for a couple years. As such both the individual spoiler notice and its use in the {{Spoiler}} template is being removed by the bot. However, Category:Articles with information from Fantastic Beasts: Cases from the Wizarding World has been added to {{FBC}} so that should help with locating related articles. FYI, there is an issue with this approach in that {{Harrypotter}}, the footer box for all the Canon source pages, uses some of the short codes. If you do any work to add these 'Articles with information from...' categories to their short codes, you'll want to double check other such templates for transclusion issues if you see odd articles showing up in the category page.

The second issue was a bug - the bot wasn't seeing "spoiler" as "Spoiler" so was adding it again. It has now been corrected - thanks for bringing it to my attention! Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:20, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, Appearances and References should make clear where information is from. The notices were put in place just for new material people may not have got to yet (such as working through the old chapter-based Pottermore site). Given the vast variety of sources it would be unwieldy to place a warning on every article not based on the original books (and FANDOM already likes to shake their finger at our abundant use of tophats ;)
Here is the current set of spoilers that are have largely been deprecated (can confirm with WhatLinksHere e.g. )
{{Pottermore}} , {{Pottermoreold}}, {{Wonderbook}}, {{Wonderbookold}}, {{Wonderpotions}}, {{Wonderpotionsold}}, {{CursedChildSpoiler}}, {{FantasticBeastsSpoiler}}, {{FBCasesSpoiler}}
And here are the current notices being applied: {{HogwartsMysterySpoiler}}, {{CrimesofGrindelwaldSpoiler}}, {{WizardsUniteSpoiler}}
The "Articles with information from..." categories have some wrinkles but appear to be doable so those will be expanded as time allows (spending too much time cleaning up other messes with the Category system currently). Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 01:26, January 4, 2019 (UTC)

Your numerous automatic edits

Could you please get a bot account (with a proper bot flag, which you would need to apply for to Wikia staff via this wiki's admins) to use for all those edits, so that they don't flood Recent Changes (not visibly) and hence drown out the other edits? They are making it hard for me and others to keep an eye out for possible vandalism. (And if you reply to this post, kindly do so here; I for one hate the dumb "wiki tennis" of spreading a talk thread over two or more user pages, making it necessary to dodge back and forth to read the entire thread. This is difficult, confusing, pointless, and banned by official policy on the Beatles Wiki, as it should be elsewhere.) — evilquoll (talk) 23:12, January 9, 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately, if I could, I would have done so already. =/ I'm being sincere; before installing scripts, I looked up what bot was, and try as I might, for some reason my brain just couldn't process what's to be done, and while I don't think I'm some supremely dimwitted person, in the end, I have other priority so I settled for the next best thing. Those edits are what needed to be done, I can either work myself to death by attempting to manually categorized 1000 images and other simpler tasks about swapping content; or, I can make my life easier by using scripts.
I'm not saying your request is unfounded or unreasonable; I totally understand and agree, but I'm admitting this is a shortcoming of mine that likely would not be overcome anytime. That being said, I did very belatedly notice one of my script was missing a function that I had assumed it had, and upon seeing this gigantic oversight of mine, I immediately went asking for help, and am now waiting for the update to be reviewed to go live. It's not what you are hoping for, but at least by marking them as "minor" edits, you'll get just a little more flexibility on what you'd be seeing. I'm not saying this solves anything, but to me, those edits being hide-able is still better than nothing.
Your concern is heard, just that I'm able to meet the demand. Rest assured, I have a RL too, so hopefully those mass edits won't be plaguing your feed too often. Hope I'm not upsetting you too much. Dx --Sammm✦✧(talk) 23:40, January 9, 2019 (UTC)
For clarity, a bot account is just a separate account that is used for any automated edits that may be high volume. In short, you would do nothing other than create a new account (my bot account is just Ironyak1-bot) and you would login to this account before running any scripts or other automated edits so your changes would not show up the activity summaries unless someone purposely choose to see edits done with a bot. Given the nature of your changes to categories and templates, especially as a Content Moderator, I would support you gaining an account with a bot flag. Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 02:41, January 10, 2019 (UTC)
Please, for goodness' sake (specifically, for the sake of those of us who check Recent Changes for suspect edits), get yourself a bot account ASAP. As Ironyak1 said above, a bot account (despite the name) doesn't have to be used only by running a literal bot on it (although it commonly is; I use AutoWikiBrowser, although that no longer seems to work on Wikia); it is for any and all bulk edits, whether automatic (by any kind of script), semi-automatic, or even fully manual. I have seen a staff member (or it may have been VSTF) give himself a bot flag in order to do a massive bulk edit. The purpose of a bot flag is not to run a bot (although I believe that Wikia no longer allows bots to run on non-bot accounts) but to hide edits made by that account from Recent Changes (unless the viewer opts to see them), so as to avoid swamping the Recent Changes to the extent that individual edits are flooded out. — evilquoll (talk) 07:48, January 14, 2019 (UTC)
Please, can you attempt to sound less snarky? =D I'm serious though, while I understand my no-bot action is inconvenient to some (I myself check recent changes, so it's not like I'm not on the same boat), I feel like I'm receiving unnecessary hostility, which, I'm letting it be known now. I say this because, I feel like it's hypocritical that you can compliment another user on their balk edits, while coming at me like I'm some nuisance; here's the thing, will you still complain if I made those edits by hand? Around half of my edits, even when marked as minor, are in fact done by hand. If you suddenly find the manual edits okay, then, perhaps redirect your ire elsewhere? I also made those edits today because today there was barely any traffic, other than that helpful user speedily doing some mass categorical edits, which, like I said, you were fine with. It would be inappropriate if I made them like on the day COG was released or something, but no, I did it on a slow day.
In respond to a "bot account", tone aside (let's face it, who likes to be talked to like they are some imbecile? I don't;) you've both make compelling points. Previously, when I say chances of me getting a bot are slim, it's like a decade later~never; now, it's like actually possible, like possibly within 5 years or sooner. Let me explain why. My memory sucks. Can't remember stuff. That includes what I was working on, what I planned to work on, my account and password, etc. My laptop also constantly runs out of memory after booting (as in, when booting, there's plenty of memory, but it'll skyrocket down as I work, without saving new things onto my laptop.) From what I gather, should I need to switch to this yet-to-be-created bot account, it's a login then logout when done thing? Yeah, at the moment, with my brain capability and my actual laptop performance, it's just not worth trying. I say this because on YouTube, I have a preferred account, but I also have a preferred gmail (not the same account,) and lately, when rebooting, I'd sometimes be logged out, and when attempting to login, the gmail one would automatically get picked, forcing me to then switch to the one I use for YT. I'm not saying on Fandom the same thing will occur, however, the process of switching accounts, slows my laptop. There's also the fact that, like I already said, I can't remember stuff. I do stuff by simply have tabs open, and that's a lot of tabs, tabs that are all logged in with this account. I can already see myself doing something in a tab with the wrong account etc.
You don't have to understand the incredulity of my situation, but as someone who has only theoretically been done with school and without a job therefore with absolutely no income, please don't say something like get a better laptop. If I could, I would. I'm saying this one more time, your concern is heard. I heard you the first time. And even if I may have some minor misunderstanding towards a so-called bot account, the reality is, while more plausible, I'm still unlikely to get a bot account ASAP. Asking me to please get one immediately, will get you nowhere. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 08:57, January 14, 2019 (UTC)

Category sorting

Can I atleast fix the letter it shorts under? It's shorting under U instead of C or P 

Tucker100 (talk) 07:15, January 13, 2019 (UTC)

It's pretty easy to do;

Were it says  <noinclude>[[Category:Userboxes|{{PAGENAME}}]]</noinclude> Change it to <noinclude>[[Category:Userboxes|<Insert Short term here>]]</noinclude> Tucker100 (talk) 07:39, January 13, 2019 (UTC)

RE:master user profile template

Hey there. Thanks for informing. I will be sure to look into it. Appologies for the inconvenience if any. Reverb frost (talk)

I mean i was aware of this feature just never good with templates. I mean its a bit embarrassing to admit this but i just recently learned how to create a template like a few days ago. But i guess i will give it a go and see how it works. Thanks again.Reverb frost (talk)
Oh not at all. You actually helped me. I appreciate that. I didn't feel embarrassed coz of your message. Thanks once again. Appreciate your helpReverb frost (talk)

My file

Hey Sammm, it's Harrypotterexpert101 again.  I just uploaded a picture to this wiki, and I am not sure if I was allowed to do that... It's this one: File:Council.png


Harrypotterexpert101 (talk) 19:23, January 19, 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I am Dave.  I am still having troubles with adding the image. And thanks for the help! I will sign what it looks like when i copied and pasted it. Do you mind helping me out?

Harrypotterexpert101[[2]] (talk) 19:44, January 19, 2019 (UTC)

Ok, I got it! Thanks so much!

Harrypotterexpert101 Council-icon-FANDOM.svg (talk) 19:55, January 19, 2019 (UTC)


Do you know any old pages that might need editing and a spell check? You recommended I edit things other than my profile to prevent it being locked, so if you have any of those pages, please let me know, and I'll see to it.

Thanks! Have a nice day, 민태준 - 슈가 (Inconvenience me here!) Slytherin ClearBG

*Disclosure: Some of the links above are affiliate links, meaning, at no additional cost to you, Fandom will earn a commission if you click through and make a purchase. Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+