Forum:Uniformity in article titles

Forums: Index > The Wizengamot > Uniformity in article titles

I'm not trying to be obnoxious but I noticed some things are not uniform, as far as article titles go. For instance, Helga Hufflepuff's Cup and Salazar Slytherin's Locket both put the names and objects in uppercase, whereas Tom Riddle's diary places the object in lowercase. I think this should be changed to create uniformity. Whether it's uppercase or lowercase the objects in the Horcrux article titles should all be the same. I also think that the title in the article on Blood purity should have uppercase on both words, making it Blood Purity. Either that, or both lowercase, though i think uppercase is more appropriate in this circumstance. It doesn't make sense to just capitalize Blood. Blood isn't a proper noun so when it appears in the middle or end of a sentence it really sticks out like a sore thumb as a grammatical error. Mafalda Hopkirk 17:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

The first letters of titles are automatically uppercase.-Matoro183 ^(Talk) 18:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright so that pretty much decides it for Blood Purity, i guess, lol. Mafalda Hopkirk 19:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. I don't know about the others though. Usually, the owner's name being placed in front of it would make it proper, and thus capitalized.......hmmm -Matoro183 ^(Talk) 19:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I personally think as far as Horcruxes go, the object should always be in lowercase, but others might disagree. Mafalda Hopkirk 19:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

A cursory check of the books indicates lower case, such as Hufflepuff's cup. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 19:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Would it be appropriate for me to change those article titles? Mafalda Hopkirk 19:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

If no one else has any objections, I don't see why not. The capitalised versions will act as redirects once you move them. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I think it looks better lower case too...-Matoro183 ^(Talk) 01:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I've tried to do this, and ran into two problems: the "create a new page" link leads to a page that doesn't work, and if I put the names of articles i want to create in the search field, instead of giving me the option to create that page, it takes me to the other one because it doesn't recognize case differences. Can the titles be manually changed on each page? Mafalda Hopkirk 13:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

You can use the Move Page feature. On the top of the page, with the other tabs, is one marked "Move". Click on it, and you should be taken to a page that has the page's current name, then an empty box. Type the name you want the page to have, then click on the move button at the bottom of the page. You don't have to create a new article at all. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 19:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much. That works quite well. Could the bot possible correct the wiki so whenever "Helga Hufflepuff's Cup" appears, it says "Helga Hufflepuff's cup", instead? Mafalda Hopkirk 22:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

You'll have to leave a message on DarkJedi613's talk page. He controls the bot. In case, all the remaining capitalised "Cups" will still redirect to the new page for the time being. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 22:13, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

This can be done yes. Just make a list of all the changes to be made and I can run them. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 19:51, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I hadn't consider it before, but what about Gaunt's Ring? I think it makes sense in that case to have uppercase on the object. What does the book officially call it, i don't have it here. Mafalda Hopkirk 22:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't have my books to hand either - I'm staying at my girlfriend's parents place over New Year. She might have a copy of HBP, tho, so I'll see if I can check. Also, I was thinking it might be better to formalise the title as Marvolo Gaunt's ring unless the text states otherwise. - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 23:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

"Marvolo Gaunt's ring" seems like a great title if it isn't in the books as something else. The only other real choice would be Cadmus Peverell's ring (maybe i'm mistaking the brothers names here) but i'm not sure that makes sense. Mafalda Hopkirk 01:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

OK to change to "Marvolo Gaunt's ring"? Mafalda Hopkirk 12:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Remember redirects are our friends. So if its known as "Marvolo Gaunt's ring" you can redirect "Gaunt's ring", "Gaunt's Ring", "Cadmus Peverell's ring", etc. to that page. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 06:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello all. I would like to express concerns that the titles of the Horcruxes are gramatically incorrect at the present time. They refer to specific objects that belong to specific people, and by rules of grammar their titles should really be capitalized. For appearances sake and to have this wiki taken seriously, I move to have the titles returned to their original forms for the sake of the wiki's image. They look a bit foolish as they are right now, since this is supposed to be an encylopedia. The books never referred to the objects by their full titles, they merely referred to them in passing titles such as "Hufflepuff's cup" or "the cup that had previously belonged to Helga Hufflepuff." In an encylopedia where the article is specifically written about them, their titles should really be gramatically correct (as in all encyclopedia articles). I'm sorry if it sounds like a small concern, I am just concerned about the wiki's image if someone looks on these articles and sees the title looks like a five-year-old's version of it. It just doesn't look professional. TomMarvoloRiddle1926 18:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

For clarity, you would disagree that "Hufflepuff's cup" and "The cup of Hufflepuff" indicates that JKR wished for the object to remain an improper noun? Mafalda Hopkirk 18:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes I would, because Rowling's fictional books are not a professional encyclopedia. With all due respect, you do not know that Rowling wanted these things to remain as they were spelled in the books (where their full titles were never used), and even so this is an encyclopedia. This is an encyclopedia about the books, not the books themselves. The books never used their full titles, thus explaining why she did not bother with it. But in a professional encyclopedia, things like this really should be capitalized. You would never see things titled this way in Encyclopedia Britannica or World Book or even the typical Wikipedia. All of these objects, which are artifacts that belonged to specific people, should have capitalized names for proper grammar and a professional image on this wiki. TomMarvoloRiddle1926 18:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, I understand your concerns in the matter. Secondly, I believe that comments such as "the title looks like a five-year-old's version of it" are unhelpful and unnecessary. Now, to the matter at hand. The books clearly refer to the objects in question in the lower case - Riddle's diary, Hufflepuff's cup, Ravenclaw's diadem, etc. They are never given a full name and title, so any title we use here is conjectural anyway. For all we know, the full title could be "The Diadem of Rowena Ravenclaw" rather than "Rowena Ravenclaw's diadem". However, for convience's sake, we use the name-object convention. We cannot know Rowling's mind, and therefore, cannot be sure of her intentions in either case. However, to use another example, Anakin Skywalker personal weapon would be refered to as Anakin Skywalker's lightsaber, not Anakin Skywalker's Lightsaber would it not? To me, the capitalisation does not look right. (What is it with all the Anakin/Vader refs today?) - Cavalier One^{(Wizarding Wireless Network)} 22:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I understand that, but something like Anakin Skywalker's lightsaber was not of as much signifigance as these artifacts were to this story. Anakin's lightsaber didn't have that signifigant of a role in Star Wars really, it was merely one of many weapons used in the story that eventually faded into obscurity. Things like the locket, the cup, the ring, etc. were necessary for Harry to complete his quest and the search for them spanned over two books. They also belonged to specific people, very important figures at that. For example, the article about the Riddle House is not capitalized. This is specific house that belonged to a specific family, and as such should be titled with both words captialized. Even in Goblet of Fire itself, the name of the Riddle House is capitalized as such as well. Again, it does not look uniform nor professional, as they refer to artifacts of great signifigance to the story. Rowling did not use the books as a professional encyclopedia; proper grammar is supposed to be used in any decent enyclopedia. This is not proper grammar since these refer to specific objects or places of great signifigance. It makes the titles look strange as I said before, to have the first one or two words capitalized and to lower-case the last word. It sticks out like a sore thumb, just to be bluntly honest (helpful or not). You would never see things of such signifigance titled like this in Encyclopedia Britannia or World Book. This being an encyclopedia, I would hope most of you would want to keep it looking like an encyclopedia and not a precise replica of the fictional book series it come from. Encyclopedias that have serious reputations do not title something "as it appears in the book," they follow rules of proper grammar and capitalization. TomMarvoloRiddle1926 03:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)