Talk:Fred and George Weasley

Spliting this article may be desired.

could we split this in to two individual articles for Fred and George. it's very unencyclopedic to have one article for both of them as if they are a single being. just saying Valin "Tnu" "Shido" Suul 17:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree...but at the same time wouldn't all the information be the same? Also, when reference from other articles usually refer to both "Fred and George". -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 21:27, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Not always. Plus, their lives veer off differently. I support moving them apart. Syu

Even if they're similar, they are still two different people. And I'm not quite sure how one dying and the other having his ear blown off qualifies as being the same information. :) Ryangibsonstewart 01:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant to say "most of the information", "all" was meant to be an exaggeration. But I think you're missing the point of my comment - the majority of the beginning information is the same, it only really becomes different in the last couple books. Besides I already said I support, I'm just trying to make sure we take everything into consideration. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 14:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Me agree cut fred some slack he just died you know!!!(Talk)4:45 Aug.16,2007

Interesting idea, although I am used to "Fred and George" since they are usually together RaggieSoft 21:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

They are the bets characters other than Sirius Black and should have their own pages

I agree, it should be separate Wiking 17:01, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

• I agree as well: they should be separate- especially after the 7th book. NighthawkLeader 01:33, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah we should do that but we should add more stuff to the articles 24.34.83.7 18:10, August 21 2007

I agree that we should split the articles up because they're two different people and they are main characters and have done different things. Kenton4224 00:30, August 23 2007 (UTC)

Well it seems an overwhelming number of people support splitting it so I would say it should be done. -- DarkJedi613 ^(Talk) 00:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Support

Well, though they look alike, they are two entirely different people (OK, so physically they'r the same but you know what I mean) 74.36.214.81 22:46, August 20 2007

Anyways

I just moved them. So... Syugecin

One reason why these guys are my favorite characters.

Ron: "How much is this?"

Fred and George: "Five galleons."

Ron: "How much is it for me?"

Fred and George: "Five galleons."

Ron: "But I'm your brother!"

Fred and George: "Ten galleons."

That was pure epic win. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.201.192.39 (talk • contribs).

Who is oldest

There is something about one of them are seconds, minutes or hours older than the other, but who is oldest of them. --Danniesen

Does it matter? I would think it's Fred, at least if Molly and Arthur Weasley went alfabetically. Ngebendi 17:21, June 19, 2010 (UTC)

I think it's fred, he's the more confident, leader like one and he always seems to do things first.

Shadow fang 19:35, March 16, 2011 (UTC)

The Only Ones Not To Be Prefects?

I've only read the first 5 books, but I don't think Ginny was a prefect. I don't have my facts staright though, only on the fifth book, but if someone could clear that up for me. Percy Jackson12 23:48, August 28, 2011 (UTC)

Ok, so let me point some things out:

1. It says only sons not to be prefects, so doesn't count Ginny

2. In the 5th book, Ginny was only in her 4th year, and you get made a prefect in your 5th year

but no, it never mentions Ginny being a prefect, so I don't think she was one, since Mrs. Weasley never made a big deal when she got her Hogwarts letter, and she didn't go to the prefects carriage with Ron and Hermione at the beginning. Hope that helps! Alumeng 20:22, October 17, 2011 (UTC)