Archived discussions
- Archive (List of archived discussions and their results)
Current discussions
- The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.
- Not Deleted --Matoro183 (Talk) 20:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Harry Potter's scar
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)
- 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.
- 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.
- 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 discussion.
January 12
Deletion Template placed by Hollyfire on the 2nd of March, 2009, because this is a pointless article.