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

Not deleted Nick O'Demus 11:14, January 16, 2011 (UTC)

• Lucinda Talkalot - person is a fake and does not exist in Harry Potter it's made up from a fanfiction
• Emma Vanity - person is a fake and does not exist in Harry Potter it's made up from a fanfiction
• Jody Jacknife - person is a fake and does not exist in Harry Potter it's made up from a fanfiction
• Jo King - person is a fake and does not exist in Harry Potter it's made up from a fanfiction

(Chaser85 14:49, January 15, 2011 (UTC))

All names are taken from a prop used in the films, which is on show in the Harry Potter Exhibition. Under our canon policy, they are eligible for inclusion. They will not be deleted. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 14:53, January 15, 2011 (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 Nick O'Demus 08:55, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

More than seven days have past, and still no list of sources in the Abandoned biro Factory article. --Texthawm ^{(Owl Me)} 14:46, January 29, 2011 (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) 21:09, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

The ' Katie Weasley' Page should be deleted. It is wrong in so many areas and is obviously someone making stuff up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zali19 (talk • contribs).

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) 21:09, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Caroline Ghostwhisper is an obvious candidate for deletion, as it has nothing but pictures that have nothing to do with Harry Pottter, nor does it have text. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Enoch exe inc (talk • contribs).

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) 21:09, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Somebody put this up as a candidate for deletion but her inner eye is one of the most important things in the books. If she did not have it voldemort would have never died because of Snape Eve's dropping on the prediction. Then voldemort created his own enemy which of course is harry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Auralder (talk • contribs).

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) 21:09, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

I think this one should definitely be removed. Apart from terrible spelling, it is empty and really doesn't contribute to this wiki. Anyone agree? *Ginny* 02:43, April 12, 2011 (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) 21:09, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

I discovered these pages: WTF and My feetsies got stuck.

There is no point to any of these pages, as they are nonsense and pose heavy vandalism to this wiki. They also really have nothing to do with Harry Potter.

I will continue to find more examples of vandalism and post it here for deletion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Enoch exe inc (talk • contribs).

I agree with this. That page is only vandalism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by IHeartAvatars (talk • contribs).

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 Nick O'Demus 09:11, June 24, 2011 (UTC)

It's about Emma Watson's ex-boyfriend.

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 --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 14:19, July 30, 2011 (UTC)

If you don't believe that Zara Malfoy is the younger sister of Draco Malfoy and the daughter of Lucius Malfoy and Narcissa Malfoy then read this book and you will think different. This is all completely written by J.K. Rowling and it is meant to tell you and explain to you a little bit more about the Malfoy family. Click or copy and paste this link into your url on the top of the page; http://www.fanfiction.net/s/3283240/11/Behind_Closed_Doors_Portrait_of_the_Malfoy_Family

The fact that it comes from a fan fiction site proves that it's fanon, and thus should be deleted. --Cubs Fan (Talk to me) 12:29, July 30, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry but it is WRITTEN BY J.K. ROWLING. So I dont think you can say that it's fanon. Have you taken the time to read it? Didnt think so. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 175.38.195.99 (talk • contribs).

Actually, I did take the time to read it, and it was written by a person who goes by the pseudonym of "Twisted Mind of a Spy". In her profile she says, "My current fan fiction obsession is True Blood with my main interest in Pam and Eric. But I've written for a few other universes since I joined ff.net in 2001 including Harry Potter, House, Grey's Anatomy, Alias, and General Hospital.In real life I'm working on an MA in international relations which requires me to do a lot of writing that, while interesting, is not nearly as fun as writing fan fic. As always I own nothing in anything I've written for except my original characters. Everything else is property of their respective creators." (emphasis added). This definitely confirms it was not written by J.K.Rowling, and it is just a piece of fanfiction. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 14:17, July 30, 2011 (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 --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:48, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

Don't delete theAnimate to inanimate Transfiguration or the inanimate to Animate Transfiguration pages I find this really useful! Not too mention I use this on my RPG on Habbo Hotel so I use this information all the time. Can you at least let me copy and paste it if you're to delete it?

Firstly, you can always go to the history right now and copy+paste the information to notepad or something if you so wish, although I don't se why you'd want to since its non-canon.

I reassert my stance that these pages seriously need to be deleted. I have repeatedly asked for canonical evidence that this distinction exists and none has been provided. I have asked on the talk pages, they have gone unanswered. I have asked the admin who restored them (twice), I was ignored. I also cannot find or recall such a canonical distinction. There does not appear to be - as far as it is humanly possible to tell - any distinction of this sort with Transfiguration magic. Thats why I rewrote the whole series of transfig articles, so that they are based on canon terms only. As such these articles are in dire need of deletion. Green Zubat 14:56, August 4, 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

I have reviewed all three of these articles and I am going to vote IN FAVOR OF DELETION. Some pages have NO CONTENT and even if they did they are nonsense. This is now TWO VOTES so if one more person can please vote for deletion then a admin can take action. -- Head of Ravenclaw 22:23, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:48, August 11, 2011 (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 --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:21, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

Heads up, this page really needs to be deleted - there's no proof that its at all different than normal priori - Green Zubat 22:04, August 11, 2011 (UTC).

I agree. I marked it canidate for deletion and yes it really does. 2 votes now. We need one more. -- Head of Ravenclaw 22:06, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

I agree, too. It doesn't make sense. Harry granger 22:13, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Deleted. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:21, August 11, 2011 (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 --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:10, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

Well of course, I created it, but it shouldn't be deleted because:

The soul fragment is not Lord Voldemort and cannot be put in his article. The soul fragment was the main antagonist of the Chamber of Secrets and needs to have his own article. I've only just joined the Harry Potter wiki. This is my first wiki, and I'm still working on it. Please edit it to make it better!

Unnecessary. Deleted. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:10, September 17, 2011 (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 --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:11, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the contents, but the page is not suitable on the HPWiki --ƃuıuɹoɥʇ^{(Send me an owl)} 08:33, July 24, 2011 (UTC)

Personally it is a unnecessary page that is irrelevant to the main standards of the variety of different pages. Seriously if anyone wishes to express their wishes on this then make this into a blog post. -Adv193 08:52, July 24, 2011 (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.

Redirected to Battle of Hogwarts. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:12, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

All of the information is already in the Battle of Hogwarts article and is presented there much better. In my opinion this topic does not warrant it's own article. -Shorty1982 23:44, August 26, 2011 (UTC)

Interesting idea, but I don't think it was significant enough to warrant a whole article and hence should be deleted. Its also already covered on the Battle of Hogwarts page—Green Zubat (owl me!). 01:55, August 27, 2011 (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 --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:12, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

I do not put the delete tag, but I want to know is the Tav (disambiguation) page is really useful, cause there's no disambiguation at all: it leads only towards a single page Tav MacDougall. --   Famini    talk    contribs   12:12, August 6, 2011 (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. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:13, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

I do not put the delete tag, but I want to know is these pages

• Harry Warner
• Albert Warner
• Jack Warner
• Sam Warner

are really useful because they are not HP related. --   Famini    talk    contribs   12:12, August 6, 2011 (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. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:13, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

Parents is a redirection towards Mary Cattermole's father. No useful and more difficult to find with the search engine the real pages of parents. --   Famini    talk    contribs   12:38, August 6, 2011 (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.

Renamed "clothing-animating spell". Not deleted. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:14, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

I did not make this page, but I personally do not think it should be deleted. I don't know where anyone got the idea that this is fanon, if anyone's seen the movie, they can see Voldemort's robes casting out and trying to strangle Harry. And the fact that this is non-canon, I don't think, makes it a legitimate reason to delete it. There are numerous other non-canon pages, such as "Petrifying curse", "Disintegrating curse", and "Fianto Duri". Why, the second one even had a template saying it was a non-canonical appearance! And I used the first two examples because we see the whole duel between Molly and Bellatrix, and they obviously did not appear. What I think could improve this particular page is possibly a name-change, and more information. But that's just me. --AlastorMoody 05:06, August 12, 2011 (UTC)

I didn't say it was fanon, I said it was non-canon, as it does not occur in the books. More importantly we don't even know if it was an actual spell, or if Voldemort's cloak itself was somehow enchanted. Jayden Matthews 09:24, August 12, 2011 (UTC)

Leave it be- We cannot use the excuse "I said it was non-canon, as it does not occur in the books"- There are plenty of articles originating from Video Games, Pottermore, the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, some entirely outside the Harry Potter Universe, and most importantly movies. It is perhaps best to wait for the DVD Release. Also, on the Canon page, it states these are considered Canon. Padfoot. 06:15, September 10, 2011 (UTC)Padfoot. 16:16, September10, 2011 (AST)

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. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:18, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

I didn't mark this as a canidate for deletion but it is nonsense. Not even mentioned in the book. -- Head of Ravenclaw 16:44, August 14, 2011 (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. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:15, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

Orange Potter and the Deathly Apple is a real spoof. AnnoyingOrangeandUkulele^{(Talk | AOW | AOW userpage | AOW talk | Subscribe | AVADA KEDAVRA!)} 15:03, August 20, 2011 (UTC)

Real or not, it's not notable enough to have it's own article. Jayden Matthews 15:26, August 20, 2011 (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. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 20:17, September 27, 2011 (UTC)

I have looked though the OotP video game main menu (see here), and I cannot see any mention of a "Transylvanian Farm". All I've seen is "Win a Night in Transylvania". --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 19:16, September 27, 2011 (UTC)

If there's no mention in canon then it should be deleted IMO. -Shorty1982 19:20, September 27, 2011 (UTC)

Oh, i'm sorry. Okay, delete it. I can tell, to my self-defence, that i saw the line while starting to play the game. --Danniesen

Agreed. Is it possible that you mistranslated it from Danish? Jayden Matthews 19:40, September 27, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, Jayden, it was not a translation mistake. No matter what language the speaked words have in a game, the written words will still be in original language. It was more like a eye-sight mistake, because the game menu moves really fast when the player have clicked on something. --Danniesen

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.