The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Article was redirected. John Reaves (talk) 18:34, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The article has no content, aside from the author saying that he doesn't know what the curse does (duh). I don't think there is even such a curse listed in the books. If someone can confirm this as the Bat-Bogey Hex, a redirect and write-up on said hex should be in order. The Chosen One ^{(Choose me!)} 08:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Not even useful as a redirect. The Bat-Bogey Hex has never been called "Curse of the Bogies." bibliomaniac₁₅ 23:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Deleted. John Reaves (talk) 18:34, 10 October 2007 (UTC) THIS IS A PIECE OF NONSENSE!!!WHO EVER HEARD OF A HARRY POTTER BOOK 8!!!!!!

Yeah Moldymort should be deleted even the guy who made this article said this was fake.-Hp7

Dragon-Pox

This article should be deleted or rewritten it says that this disease occurs usually on old people but Horace Slughorn said that it was surprising that Abraxas had this disease-User:Hp7

Batty Fuck Complete idiotical nonsense nuff said-Hp7

Pantalonius Poopicus This is made up this is not a real spell it says there that it causes your enmy to "soil" himself-Hp7

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Deleted. John Reaves (talk) 18:36, 10 October 2007 (UTC) There has been a deletion candidacy placed on C. 1951 citing as reason "already have 1951" but "1951" is just a redirect to 1950s. If we're not going to create individual year articles in that decade then the redirects should be to 1950s...I do think that both a c. 1951 and a 1951 article would be overkill,the link should be "c. 1951" where there is some doubt as to an event's occurring in exactly that year.--Louis E./le@put.com/12.144.5.2 05:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I felt that the article was overkill. If 1951 is the year we think it happened in it should just be placed in the 1951 article. The reason there is no seperate 1951 article right now is cause there isn't enough information so its just grouped into a decade. We probably should create seperate articles for each year, I think it's two seperate issues then and C. 1951 should still be deleted. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 21:36, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Deleted. John Reaves (talk) 18:37, 10 October 2007 (UTC) We may be many things, a wiki, an encyclopedia, a community of HP-lovers, but one thing we are not is a repository for walkthroughs or cheats for Harry Potter games, no matter how engrossing, interesting, or graphically advanced they may be. The Chosen One ^{(Choose me!)} 17:59, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed..I believe its more suited for the Harry Potter Fanon then here..--Cometstyles 19:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, well put! But yes, if anyone wants cheats or walkthroughs they should go to a site specifically for cheats and walkthroughs rather than a miscellaneous information site. --Littlesparrow 12:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Alrighty-o, I don't think anybody will oppose, other than the fans who posted the stuff in the first place. I have edited the policy page to include game cheats and walkthroughs in the "Delete on Sight" list - admins, please take note. Any objections, please post in the CommPortal. So, here goes (and there's another walkthrough about the crumple retraction challenge something or other, will get that too). The Chosen One ^{(Choose me!)} 15:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Article was merged and redirected. bibliomaniac₁₅ 04:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Stub article that turns out to be a subpage. Deletion or merging would be best. bibliomaniac₁₅ 00:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm thinking merging and redirecting to Apparation would be best. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 01:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. bibliomaniac₁₅ 04:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Article was deleted. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 09:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Pointless, one sentence, poorly written page. Dormitories isn't even spelled right. No relevant information.Ravenmaster 07:43, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

This article is very poorly written that even sweet Helga Hufflepuff be angry.-Hp7

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Article was kept, since it is separate from Healer. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 09:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

First, it should be healer, and second, it has basicly no content.Chris Chaud 19:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

• Your wrong. There is a difference between a Healer and a Mediwizard. A Healer works at St.Mungos, while a Mediwizard is a field doctor. For example, at the Quidditch Game, and at the first challenge of the Tri Wizard cup. Just because it has almost no content, doesn't mean we should delete it. If you want a encylopedia, you need everything. If you delete this, then your encylopedia is no complete. It can be merged with healer, if you think thats a good idea.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Article was deleted. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 09:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

This article could be merged with Cho Chang and Harry Potter if verifable.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Harry Potter News now redirects to Harry Potter Wiki:Daily Prophet news - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 09:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm certainly annoyed that Manticore tagged this for deletion! It's rather obvious to me that material newly released about the series or fandom needs a place to be reported...and where better?--Louis E./le@put.com/12.144.5.2 03:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Harry Potter News is posted on the main page. Lemniwinks

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Deletion tags were removed by JohnReaves. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 09:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Recently, an anon has listed several image files with deletion tags for lack of copyright information. Can we just provide the information if known and remove the tags? Obviously some of the pictures are promotional images or screencaps and can be listed as such, but I didn't want to just go ahead with it and remove deletion tags since this is usually considered as vandalism. Alternatively, we can reupload the images with proper copyright tags. Needless to say, we would lose some high quality images if they were deleted, and I don't think we want that to happen. - Cavalier One 07:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Article was deleted since it was unverified. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 09:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I can find no canon evidence in the books, films or games for this spell. I even looked through the HP Lexicon's list of spells for it and found nothing. Can anyone provide a source for it? If not, it will be deleted. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 07:29, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Redirected to British terms - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 08:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I have recently placed a delete tag on this article and wish to open a discussion around it. Does it deserve its own article as a slang term? Or should we create a Slang page and place all known slang into it? - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 07:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm thinking that maybe we should keep this one. After all there should be room in this wiki for even the smallest pieces of the HP universe. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 12:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

See, the only thing is that "Wotcher" (or some variation thereof eg. "Wotcha") is quite common to some British folk such as myself as a greeting. It is not HP specific. If we allow Wotcher to remain, we should expand and create Blimey, Crikey, Sod, and all the other little British words from the book. And if we do that, then we could umbrella the whole page under something like "British terminology". - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 10:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Didn't know that. Remove it. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 13:22, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we need page here on it. We could redirect those pages to a page that is a soft redirect to the Wikipedia article (en:wp:British slang). John Reaves (talk) 18:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Wotcher is a completely foreign term to me other than in the HP series. Taking into account what everyone has said here, I think John Reaves' solution makes the most sense. Mafalda Hopkirk 20:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Just for the record -- wikipedia:British slang does not have an entry for "Wotcher". Also Git was created which I believe will have the same thing happen to it as Wotcher. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 03:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

DarkJedi613, we had a little discussion about this over at Forum:Slang Page. I think the concensus is to create a page to deal with all British slang, and link to there from articles. Being British myself, I will be taking an active role while rereading the books for other projects on the wiki. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 12:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I know that there is some debate, but this has been on debate for at least a month. I think that it should be deleted or taken off the delete debate. I also support a slang page22:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)Harry Potter Fantic 1

I had never heard Wotcher before, so I just ignored it in the book. As far as Git goes, I created the page, so of course I am biased. I though it needed an article because of the prolific amount of times it was used in the series. I think it was used over 200 times in one book alone. Having said that, If you wanted to make a "british slang terms used in Harry Potter" article and merge them all into one, that would be fair. I don't like redirecting to wikipedia, and I think it would be nice to have an article that includes ONLY the slang used in the series. IthinkIwannaLeia

Already created at Slang Terms. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 12:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The Strangling page is, i'm sorry, absolutely stupid. Why not have a page for walking and talking? Am i missing something? Mafalda Hopkirk 00:41, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't get that page. -Matoro183 ^(Talk) 01:22, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree ... we either don't link to it, or link to the Wikipedia entry on Strangling. I'm for deletion, followed by linking to Wikipedia. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 09:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Done -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 03:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Just came across this article. Does it have any merit here? Is just a copy of a news article! - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 09:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

If it was expanded I think it might have merit. But in its current state, no. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 13:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Done -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 03:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Harry Potter Fantic 1 has requested deletion of this page, and upon reviewing it, I would tend to agree. However, since I am not active in the fan fiction community (or even read it), I want to know if there is any reason to keep the article, and if this individual is noteworthy enough to be on this wiki. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I think this is a really, really inappropriate article and just encourages internet bullying. Who knows who this person is. She could be six years old for all we know, and it could be considered harassment. Mafalda Hopkirk 08:50, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Mafalda, you have some good reasoning there, and I honestly hadn't thought of that. For the reasons listed above, I'm deleting the article. If any of my fellow admins disagree, please let me know. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 14:50, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Done - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 08:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

I'm for deletion of this article -- its unnecessary and I don't think there is much that could be expanded on besides what is in the article. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 14:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Information should be merged with Tom Riddle/ Lord Voldemort. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 14:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I think its all in there already. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 14:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

In that case, delete. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 14:28, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Done -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 14:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Personally, I feel that this article about a specific section of the HP fandom is not notable enough to include in this wiki. If we allow one subset of fans their own page, then we have to do it for all fan groups, and that will clog up the wiki with fan/ vanity pages. Thoughts on this? - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 01:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree, I don't belive any fanon should be aloued on this wiki, but I know you allow some i.e. Wizard Rock, but this is nowhere near notable enough, I hadn't even heard of it!Harry Potter Fantic 1 02:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)Harry Potter Fantic 1

This is just a bid for internet fame or advertising for that site and i think this is the wrong place for it. Besides it isn't written in encyclopedic format. Mafalda Hopkirk 09:22, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead and Delete, we found a diffrent wikia. I just wanted to point out that 1. We aren't trying to get internet fame since we already have it. 2. We aren't advertising for a site, we don't want others to join. We have been asked why we didn't have a wikia site by someone who had heard of us (you might even call them a fan!) and we went ahead with the idea. Firehawk905 14:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Done - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.