The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Members of the Order of the PhoenixEdit

(from discussion page)Do we really need a page with links to categories about the Order of the Phoenix? We have all the members listed at Order of the Phoenix anyway, and characters are categorised by whether or not they were in the first or second orders. And, by deleting, we eliminate an Orphaned Page. - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 14:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

If all the info is located on the main article then I don't see the need for a second page. Mafalda Hopkirk 20:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

As noted, I'm for deletion of this article. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 08:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Done - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 09:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Grandmother RemusEdit

1. Her first and last name can never be known 2. Her first name is not Grandmother and her last name is not Remus - Remus is Lupin's first name. 3. How can her blood status ever be determined? Mafalda Hopkirk 17:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleted - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Grandfather RemusEdit

1. His first and last name can never be known 2. His first name is not Grandfather and his last name is not Remus - Remus is Lupin's first name. 3. How can his blood status ever be determined? Mafalda Hopkirk 17:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleted - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Magic AncestorEdit

Fanon. Mafalda Hopkirk 17:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleted - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Goblin ancestorEdit

Fanon. Mafalda Hopkirk 17:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleted - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

John LupinEdit

Fanon. Mafalda Hopkirk 17:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleted - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Remus Jhon LupinEdit

Not a typo. Duplicate page of Remus Lupin. Mafalda Hopkirk 17:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleted - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Dave LegenoEdit

Unless this person is going to act in future HP movies it has nothing to do with HP. Mafalda Hopkirk 22:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

According to The Leaky Cauldron, he is rumoured to be playing Fenrir Greyback in Half-Blood Prince. Cleaned up and kept for now, but will be deleted if it proves false. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

• Article was deleted - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 08:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

What does the bottom of the book one meansEdit

Not a typo. Garbage. Mafalda Hopkirk 03:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Vandalism?Edit

There has recently been the addition (by 66.245.29.175) of all these pages of characters who, from what I can tell, are not from the HP series at all. They are all listed as "Muggles". I think they may be characters from the television show Heroes, but I'm not familiar enough with it to be sure. I've tagged a few for deletion, but I think they're all vandalism. 24.141.82.173 23:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

They were all Heroes character, yep. Great show but not welcome here. All deleted. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 08:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Unidentified studentEdit

I just think that this article is not necessary. The character doesn't exist in the books, and has a very minor role in the movie. The title is not very "professional", and it is just not a good article. Freakatone 17:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Got to go with Keep on this one. He's a notable addition to the movies, is arguably as important and noticable as Nigel, and just because he isn't in the books is no reason not to include him on the wiki. This wiki covers all aspects of the HP universe, from the books to the games. Also, while the title may not be "professional", it is accurate. Also, the character reportedly has garner a small amount of interest within certain elements of the fan community. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 17:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Cavlier One. He's a character -- no matter how small. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 16:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

yeah, you guys are right, after re-watching the movie, he is a way more important character than I remembered him to be. Freakatone 16:39, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Harry Potter & Cho ChangEdit

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

All info was merged so the page itself can be deleted. Mafalda Hopkirk 12:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 09:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

{{{result}}} {{{sig}}}

Has been added to Non-canonical spells-Matoro183 ^(Talk) 13:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

No. Non-canonical spells needs to be split into individual articles. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 14:43, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, then I'll remove the delete tag-Matoro183 ^(Talk) 19:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Beat you to it. :) -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 22:05, 11 June 2008 (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 an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Done. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 03:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

The article's name is mispelled. Already exists an article with the right name (Verdimillious). Seth Cooper 03:27, 1 July 2008 (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 an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

{{{result}}} {{{sig}}}

There is other pages about creatures that don't exsist, so I don't see why this page needs to be deleted. There's nothing to say that mythical creatures can't have a page. Palmala 6 July

I removed the template. I'm thinking maybe we could have use another category besides "Creatures" for made up creatures. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 19:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Good idea, there are quite a few that are classed as creatures but have no prove of being real. Palmala 20:37, 6 July 2008

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 an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

' Done' -- Freakatone ^Talk 17:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

This seems a little too...wikipedian. Why do we need categories if we don't use them instead of this article?--Matoro183 ^(Talk) 11:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Having a list of characters underimines the real world perspective of the wiki. It's gotta go. - –K.A.J^{•T•C•E•} 15:46, 10 July 2008 (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 an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Deleted -- Freakatone ^Talk 20:15, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Their is no evidence that this is real anywhere. Me_Potter_Fan ^(Talk) 10:45, 6 July 2008 (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 an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Kept -- Freakatone ^Talk 11:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Dog needs to be kept. There are dogs in the wizrding world.--Matoro183 ^(Talk) 10:35, 14 July 2008 (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 an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Deleted. -- Freakatone ^Talk 01:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't recall ever hearing this term in canon. Lorcan d'Eath is referred to as part-vampire, not half-vampire. Also, there's no evidence that Rufus Scrimgeour is half-vampire. The only thing that comes close is Luna speculating that he is a vampire at one point. Oread 21:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm thinking Merge with part-vampire and delete (or maybe redirect?) -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 18:26, 13 July 2008 (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 an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Deleted -- Freakatone ^Talk 00:56, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

do I really need to say why? Me_Potter_Fan ^(Talk) 00:32, 19 July 2008 (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 an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Deleted --Matoro183 ^(Talk) 11:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

That was my mistake. I wanted to do this into the german wiki. Can be deleted.--Rodolphus 11:33, 9 August 2008 (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 an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

'

I disagree with this canadate. This is known information and such f what we are getting in the movie. Please reconsider. I am improving it, it just takes a while, as it is a big page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ChaosMaster16 (talk • contribs).

I think it should be deleted, with any relevant information moved to the Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (film) article. There's a special thanks section at the end as well, which is completely unencyclopedic. Oread 15:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Its a completely worthless article, it adds nothing to the wiki, and it's totally unencyclopedic. –K.A.J^{•T•C•E•} 15:49, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 16:26, 17 August 2008 (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 an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Not Deleted --Matoro183 ^(Talk) 20:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion template placed by Oread on 21st December, removed by You-Know-Who on the same date. The template should not have been removed - if an article is believed to be worthy of deletion by one party, it must be discussed and the community consensus heeded. Deletion notice claims information is a repetition of information already in the Harry Potter article, and as such does not need its own article. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 15:37, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

My actions is the result of my ignorance and because i am new here, and i am VERY SORRY for that. My main reason why i created the Harry Potter's scar Article is because that portion of the story is also important to me. And I'm thinking also that it would be help for others who will search for that article and instead to read the entire Harry Potter main article. - You-Know-Who--You-Know-Who 16:14, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not dead-set against this article — the scar is quite important to the series — but it seems rather arbitrary to me. The scar is a part of Harry. We don't have separate articles for Peter Pettigrew's silver hand, or Moody's wooden leg or eye. And all of those are separate objects on their own, artificial replacements; Harry's scar may be inbued with magical peculiarities, but it is still very much a part of him. It's inconsistent. Also, as I said in the original tag, the article does not present any information that isn't already present in the Harry Potter article. However, I agree that some people may want to read about the scar without having to look at the entire Harry Potter article, which is rather long. Oread 17:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I added some quotes from the series (films and book) that gives additional information about Harry Potter's scar, to give discuss expansion about the scar, and i believe it is very annoying if it is read or to input in Harry Potter's main article.--You-Know-Who 19:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

i think, i'll change the title to "lightning scar" instead of "Harry Potter's scar". --You-Know-Who 01:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

The article now does seem to have more information that would clutter the Harry Potter article, so I can see the argument for keeping it, but I still think there is a consistency issue. However, I'm going to move the article back to its original name. "Lightning scar" sounds as if it is a scar caused by lightning. If the title was going to be based on the shape of the scar, it would have to be "Lightning bolt-shaped scar". "Harry Potter's scar" is the most specific. Oread 05:20, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Recently, i move the article to "Lightning scar" the reason is because, that is not the only scar that Harry's got in the series. I realize it when i re-read the Order of the Phoenix and watched the movie too. Harry also got scar on his hand, remember? When Dolores Umbridge punish him in her office. In the book, it resulted as a scar. it was mentioned as "white scar" to be exact.
For this reason, We can still use the Lightning scar as the title, as if it is only mentioned in the series referring to the scar on Harry's forehead. What do you think, moderators? --You-Know-Who 05:59, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

While Harry Potter Wiki has had articles on personal possessions for some time, until the article on Harry's scar was created, we didn't have an article about a specific physical feature. I can understand having an article on a physical feature if it's unique and relevant to the plot, like Harry's scar, or if it's an example of a magical device not seen elsewhere in the series, like Moody's false eye or Pettigrew's silver hand. We definitely need to revise our notability guidelines if we plan on accepting articles of this type. We don't need stuff like "Severus Snape's nose," "Lily Evans' eyes," and "Ronald Weasley's freckles" popping up. I agree with You-Know-Who that the title "Harry Potter's scar" is kind of ambiguous. The only alternatives I can think of are "Harry Potter's lightning bolt-shaped scar" and "Harry Potter's forehead scar." ★ Starstuff ^{(Owl me!)} 04:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't compare Harry Potter's scar to Severus Snape's snose or Lily Evan's eyes. Harry's scar is very different and very very important to the story so i decided to create this article, it so dissapointing that in the Harry Potter encyclopedia like this, having very lack of information. Some pages are look disgusting and very annoying to the eyes while reading it. That is the one reason why i joined here, to help... --You-Know-Who 09:03, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting Harry's scar isn't important in the books or that we shouldn't have an article on it. I'm only saying that having an article on a notable physical feature like Harry's scar could possibly lead someone to create one or more articles on features that aren't all that relevant to the story. People might have different interpretations of what is important to the story, though, which is why I brought up Lily's eyes, because they're mentioned several times throughout the books and do play a significant symbolic role. As for Ron's freckles and Snape's nose, I just threw those in as examples of articles someone might create as a joke, if they saw the article on Harry's scar and came to the conclusion that our standards of notability must not be very high. Which is why I said I think we need to lay out some notablity rules. It will help to prevent misunderstandings. Also it will help to resolve the consistency concerns which Oread expressed above. ★ Starstuff ^{(Owl me!)} 10:27, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Yah! Yah, now i got your point or what you are trying to say Starstuff, and i agree with you. --You-Know-Who 16:44, 29 December 2008 (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.