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

Keep and improve; moved to Inbreeding. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 15:30, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

I move for deletion. The wiki is not the place for essays and I don't really see how this one can be saved, though I wanted to get some other thoughts first rather than straight deleting. ProfessorTofty (talk) 17:23, December 27, 2012 (UTC)

How about keeping the article, after a thorough clean-up and expansion, and moving it to simply "Inbreeding", to avoid the essay-like title? I think there's enough information to warrant its own article, and it's an aspect of wizarding life that is referred to more than once in the series. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 17:37, December 27, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I like it, but it's going to require quite a bit of work. Okay, let's improve the article and try to save it. I have some other projects to take care of at the moment, but if I have time today, I'll try to make some improvements. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:09, December 27, 2012 (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 as redirect -- ProfessorTofty (talk) 19:08, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Keep: This article contains much matter about the fictional world. And real-world information about the filming is surely relevant. (Unless the matter in this article is duplicated elsewhere.) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:10, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

I, personally, have no idea what you're talking about; Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (film) was never flagged for deletion. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (movie) was, mainly because it already exists (see first link) but also because there were various plot, spelling and grammar issues. That film was never flagged for deletion, and the duplicate article seems to have been merged or redirected. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 15:26, December 30, 2012 (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.

No consensus/weak keep -- ProfessorTofty (talk) 19:04, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

• Keep: I've improved the wording (which I agree was awful) to give it the best chance I can, and I think it's actually a valid aspect of duelling (which if anything is an under-documented aspect of the HP universe, compared to its fictional importance). While I would agree the basics should be included in the duel article, an actual merge would mean adding instances of its use to the page, which would clutter it unnecessarily, and removing it completely would remove facts about the HP world from the Wiki – I'd say it would be much better to keep them separate and allow readers to see the known examples in a straightforward article. As for its scope, it would be interesting to go through the books again looking for any time when a specific spell is thought to give away who the caster was (the Dark Mark is a related example that springs to mind, though perhaps not a signature spell as such), or when a spell is used predictably, and simply by compiling a table of which spells characters are said to use in combat it may be possible to see trends (e.g. x always casts spell y, which I suppose was Lupin's point to Harry – there are bound to be more examples). We could also put a lighthearted reference to the Full Body-Bind Curse in Pottermore in "Behind the scenes". ;) --xensyria^T 09:41, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with xensyria; it is in my opinion worth keeping despite the lack of direct identification of it as such in canon. And even if it is just Expelliarmus, Sectumsempa and Avada Kedavra, we have an article on a video-game only, seen-once spell that only documents what happens when a couple of fourteen-year olds cast it. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 18:18, January 2, 2013 (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 -- ProfessorTofty (talk) 19:12, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

• Delete. In the bin with it. It is from wikipedia:The_Mystery_of_the_Druids. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 15:27, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

You're a bit late; the deletion has already been done, along with the other image from the same source uploaded by the same user. — RobertATfm (talk) 15:33, December 30, 2012 (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, though joking aside, there was good info that has been added to the apple article ProfessorTofty (talk) 02:20, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I realize we have pretty lax notability standards, but yeah, I'm really struggling to see to the value in this. What's next? Ronald Weasley's bacon sandwich? Harry Potter's treacle tart he ate at the feast? I was tempted to just delete this straight off, but I suppose I'll just let it to go to the normal vote. ProfessorTofty (talk) 01:11, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

As I just posted in the talk page for the article, I would have deleted it right off without waiting for anyone to do anything for it. However, as a regular contributor the best I could do was add a deletion tag and make it look pretty until it got deleted. So as you can see I'm definitely all for deleting this article; that's two votes for deletion, we need one more. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 01:16, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

no wai guis we hav to keep it bcuz drapple is mai otp n its tots notabl and stuff Delete. -- 1337star ^{(Drop me a line!)} 02:03, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

Er... could I please have a translation of your first sentence, thanks? --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 02:08, January 2, 2013 (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.

Speedily deleted ProfessorTofty (talk) 19:20, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

• Delete: The title makes it look like an essay and then all it has is that Durmstrang teaches charms, potions and care of magical creatures; and we can't even verify that. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 18:20, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

As far as I can remember, all known information is already included into Dark Arts (class)--Rodolphus (talk) 18:35, January 2, 2013 (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.