Can someone explain to me why a Harry Potter wiki needs an article on something that couldn't have less to do with Harry Potter? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs).

I have to agree. I'm not seeing how someone saying "Thank God" justifies having an article for this on the Harry Potter wiki. - Nick O'Demus 19:53, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
Because it's mentioned in canon. We're talking of God strictly as an alluded character in the books. If wizards were to worship a different deity (as in "You're alright! Thank ABC!") I don't think there would be any problem with creating the hypothetical "ABC" article. The same goes here, I guess. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 15:53, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
It's not even an allusion. It's an extremely common everyday phrase. This in no way, shape or form justifies an article on a non-existent deity, that never appears in Harry Potter.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs).
Existant or not, it's mentioned several times and is as article-worthy as, say gorgon, who was also only mentioned in canon in a idiomatic expression "Gallopin' Gorgons".—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Seth Cooper (talkcontribs).

No it's not article-worthy. It has absoloutley nothing to do with anything.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs).

The mere mention constitutes an aspect of wizarding (and Muggle) culture. This seems, to me, to be a pretty good reason to have an article on Him. If God wasn't mentioned, then I would think you'd have a point. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 14:35, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

Hell is mentioned a lot, as Ron constantly says "Bloody hell" and we don't have an article on it. The terms that came from expressions are from wizard idioms. God came from real expressions that J.K. Rowling did not make up but copied. SeanWheeler 23:35, November 17, 2011 (UTC)

Looking back on this discussion, while I sometimes have felt that the inclusion of certain articles is a bit silly, one thing that can happen is that often further development results in more references. For example, there are now ten different articles linking to this page, and I am sure there will be more. I don't think that there can be any doubt now that the topic is entirely relevant. Therefore, while including certain stuff may seem silly at first, sometimes you end up finding more and more info and connections. On a sidenote, we actually do have an article for Hell now. ProfessorTofty (talk) 06:08, March 12, 2013 (UTC)

Wording change

If nobody objects, I would change the wording "God is the omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent and omnibenevolent being in theistic and deistic religions" to "God is the omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent and omnibenevolent being as defined by certain theistic and deistic religions." As has been pointed out by brighter minds than mine, while many religions make such claims, they are a technical impossibility. God cannot by definition both omnipotent and omnibenevolent if one accepts the standard definitions of both terms. Of course, the issue is argued, but I still feel a change in wording is merited. ProfessorTofty (talk) 21:28, September 15, 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. It's more NPOV, anyways. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 21:56, September 15, 2012 (UTC)


This has nothing to do with the above debate as to whether He deserves His own article; I just wanted to express my surprise that Canadian citizens haven't been blocked from viewing or talking about this, or that the Canadian government hasn't deleted this page - they say it's offensive to other religions to bring up God. --Hunnie Bunn 13:18, March 12, 2013 (UTC)

Really? I thought it was only Islam where people got really tetchy about any images or anything, but just mentioning it? Is it actually written down legally or anything, or is more just of a guideline thing? Because if it isn't down as a legal guideline, then it isn't enforceable. ProfessorTofty (talk) 16:57, March 12, 2013 (UTC)
Well, a kid got expelled from my school - yes, expelled - simply for saying "God bless, and Merry Christmas" on the last day before winter break. So I'm not sure if it's written down legally or anything, but it is considered quite bad to talk about. --Hunnie Bunn 17:24, March 12, 2013 (UTC)
True, but that's school, though. They can enforce different rules there. We have separation of church and state in the U.S. too-- you're not supposed to promote anything religious at a government school. Though they normally wouldn't take it quite that far just for something like that. ProfessorTofty (talk) 18:09, March 12, 2013 (UTC)

Faith in the Wizarding World

I think the article seems to imply that only Muggles believe in God (as shown with the phrase "Muggle societies"), but as explained on the "Christianity" page there seems to be instances of Wizards being Christians or at least following Christian cultural traditions. Shouldn't the text be changed to "God is a central figure in many societies"? Chanpuruuu (talk) 16:02, June 17, 2014 (UTC)