Fandom

Harry Potter Wiki

Talk:Antidote to Veritaserum

Back to page

14,506pages on
this wiki
Add New Page

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

Existence

I do not believe that this antidote exists. Dumbledore says that Slughorn "probably" carried an antidote since the stated time, but that does not mean that he did carry one. There is no information suggesting that an antidote to Veritaserum even exists. This article doesn't add anything to the wiki, since it states nothing new that you can't learn on another article on the wiki and I suggest we delete this (not to mention that it's only linked on a few minor articles so nothing would be lost from removing this page). --Sajuuk 17:12, April 5, 2016 (UTC)

Givin that Dumbledore is a knowledgable character, and that he implied it exists. We can reasonably assume it does exist. By him saying Horace "probably" carries an antidote for Veritaserum, he is suggesting the antidote exists. I believe this article should be kept because of that so that the wiki has the relevant information, which will continue the wikis reputation as a reliable source. Zane T 69 (talk) 03:18, April 6, 2016 (UTC)
And this information could reasonably be found by any person on some other article. An article should exist because it tells users about things they're unlikely to find in large detail on another article, but this is almost certainly going to be mentioned somewhere else, it isn't notable enough to need a whole article to just repeat the contents of some other page.
And implying that something exists does not mean that it does, Dumbledore may have simply dissuaded Harry from using Veritaserum for a number of reasons, not just because Dumbledore thinks that Horace has an antidote (the article quotes the section of text, which only makes an implication and does not state a fact). There are plenty of things that have been mentioned by characters which likely don't exist, yet have an article here, which are just based on speculative information rather than a fact. --Sajuuk 08:37, April 7, 2016 (UTC)
I'l agree that it can be found on some other article, but wiki users will have to remember the article, then CTRL+F to find it, if the page is deleted of course. By your own arguement this page should exist, "An article should exist because it tells users about things they're unlikely to find in large detail on another article". The wiki has several redundacies on it but it works. This may exist in universe, its implied to exist, yes. If this makes sense it wasn't implied to not exist though. Meaning there are grounds to keep the page. This page is six years old you seem to be the only one with a problem with it, i'm not trying to start an argument but thats how it seems. I'l link an admin to page let them have final say. Zane T 69 (talk) 21:44, April 7, 2016 (UTC)
(An admin hardly has "final say" just because; I'm just here to contribute to the dialogue)
My take on Dumbledore's line is that a an antidote to Veritaserum definitely exists (even though we can't be certain Slughorn did carry one with him at all times) — it would be pretty much self-defeating (a definitely awkward statement, at least) if Dumbledore ruled out using Veritaserum on Slughorn because he might be carrying an antidote if there wasn't an antidote.
Either way, there's nothing against having articles on such minor subjects like this one. Quite the contrary, in fact: the whole point of having a separate Harry Potter-specific wiki is to be able to have articles on all sorts of meaningless pieces of trivia and assorted canon bits and bobs -- where else would you be able to read about onions in the context of Harry Potter canon? Or about Octopus Powder? Or that one soup they serve at the Leaky Cauldron? Or that one weird-sounding substance mentioned once on a box prop that you couldn't even see properly in the films? --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:23, April 7, 2016 (UTC)
@Seth Cooper: I agree the point of a Harry Potter wiki is to cover all Harry Potter related content. However, I am saying that this page does not add anything notable to the wiki, because the limited levels of content this page contains could easily be added to other articles and users would still find the content from it as a result. Hell, all of this could just get merged onto the Veritaserum page and nobody would notice the difference if this was redirected to a heading on that page. Information still provided and not needing a wholly separate article.
@Zane T 69: Length of time that an article has existed does not mean anything. Just because someone made a page 6 years ago does not mean that the page can still stick around, that's not how wiki's work. People create pages all the time, that doesn't give them a free pass to stick just based on "creation date", some users simply create pages because they think the content doesn't exist, even though it does.
I thought this was a wiki run by fans for fans. I'm not aware that anyone here is paid to make this the official HP wiki: therefore, users (and the community) shape what content appears on it. Apparently I'm not allowed to "be bold" and improve the wiki here by suggesting that minor articles based (literally) on one single word or sentence without existing in any other medium be merged to help users find the content and information they want. --Sajuuk 10:54, April 8, 2016 (UTC)
@Sajuuk: I wasn't implying it should stay merely because its been around six years, I was citing that you seemed to be the only one who dislikes the page. It is a wiki run by fan for fans, we are just debating points of view getting our views out to get support for keeping or deleting. You are allowed to be bold, i'm not trying to restrict your rights, I merely disagree with this deletion, and I want people to know my reasons, just as you have stated your reasons for deletion. Eventually this will either get support for either motion. I'm not trying to start a fight.  Zane T 69 (talk) 21:13, April 8, 2016 (UTC)

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki