I agree with its deletion. Quirinus Quirrell
Is this witch named Joanne Kathleen Rowling like the author (althrough Kathleen is not the authors name)?? If named this then the named should be changed to Joanne Kathleen Rowling. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Danniesen (talk • contribs).
- It is impossible to determine this individual's name from the information we have at the present time. -- 01:25, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Is she even a witch?
- Felix Alan Cadmus Scamander 08:28, April 16, 2016 (UTC)
How do we know that the in-universe version of J.K. Rowling is a witch? In the introduction of the Tales of Beedle the Bard, she refers to muggle fairy tales as "our fairy tles," and coninues to imply that she is a muggle throughout the introduction. Wouldn't it make more since to assume that she is a squib since she knows about the magical world but speaks as if she is part of the muggle world?Icecreamdif 00:11, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
- That would make sense. I'll make the necessary changes to the article. -- 01:25, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Then again, she might afterall be a Muggle with a lot of insight on wizardry. Perhaps before 2007, the International Statutue of Secrecy was overruled due to an increase in intermagical marriages, and Muggles and Wizards resolved to live in harmony. J.K. Rowling perhaps is a muggle who documents the lives of wizards and witches, as she did with the famous Harry Potter.
- Or she can be the muggle parent of a muggleborn witch or wizard, or a muggle who married a witch or wizard. We probably shouldn't make any assumptions, since there are quite a few types of people who would identify as muggles but have knowledge of the wizarding world. For all we know, she might just be a muggle who made up all that information about the wizarding world.18.104.22.168 01:57, March 2, 2012 (UTC)
| This discussion is listed as an Active Talk Page.|
Please remove this template when the question has been answered.
First of all, by our naming policy, this article should be at J. Rowling, should it not? It seems that our naming policy doesn't apply to real world articles, which I'm fine with, and I'm not arguing that the page on the real author should be renamed. But this is a character within the Harry Potter mythos, and as thus should be consistent with every other character's page.
More importantly, I think the "decision" that the in-universe Rowling is a Squib was a little too hasty, and is faulty. There's no evidence that suggests that Rowling isn't the Muggle relative or wife of a wizard or witch, or even just a Muggle privy to the existence of the wizarding world for some other reason (I have a whole headcanon theory about the in-universe Rowling, but it's almost completely fanon and thus not on topic here). Indeed, the very evidence of her not being a witch practically contradicts her being a Squib as well. Would she really refer to Muggle fairy tales as "our fairy tales" if she was raised by wizarding parents on wizarding tales? This has bugged me for a long time, and I think now's the time to change this.-- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 03:27, October 31, 2013 (UTC)