Wikia

Harry Potter Wiki

Talk:Unidentified pipe-smoking wizard

11,885pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Rename

Should this be moved to "Wizzy"? In Thomas Taylor's blog, the picture featuring this wizard is titled 'Wizzy.jpg'. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 23:15, August 2, 2011 (UTC)

Canon?

Can he be considered canon, given that he never actually appeared in the text? ProfessorTofty (talk) 00:46, December 22, 2012 (UTC)

Well, the artist's playing in the Harry Potter sandbox – he's distinctively a Harry Potter wizard (the awesome dress sense gives him away), and is certainly licensed by the appropriate companies. I wonder if illustrations should have a place in the wiki's canon hierarchy; if so then he's bound not to contradict any other canon source, so surely he'd be in. His name doesn't seem canon though, as it seems more like the artists' nickname for him (or actually just a quick name given to the file) in an out of universe blog, than a name given in a canon source, at least to me. --xensyriaT 15:48, December 29, 2012 (UTC)
All good points. For that matter, if Wizzy is canon, then would it be fair to say that Wizzy's pipe and Wizzy's book are canon also, and thus article-worthy? ProfessorTofty (talk) 16:10, December 29, 2012 (UTC)
Well, if my logic holds then canon, yes... but where was it I was just reading where someone (I think it was you) called for a criterion for what's article-worthy? Otherwise I suppose we could have one article for each hypothetical thread that made up each item of his clothes! That said, I really want to know what was in his book now :D --xensyriaT 16:30, December 29, 2012 (UTC)
P.S. I can see that readers who didn't grow up with him on the back cover wouldn't be as sentimental about him (and might just think he's more than a little bit obscure) as those of us who saw him every time we picked up the first book! --xensyriaT 16:33, December 29, 2012 (UTC)

Update

Thomas Taylor's latest comments, when asked if the wizard's name was Wizzy:

"I don’t know where the name ‘Wizzy’ comes from, but it doesn’t come from me. If I think of something better (which won’t be difficult!), I might post it here."
"Correction: it DOES come from me, it seems, but only because I used that word as a quick file name. Perhaps I should just rename the file:-)"

It's a shame, as it would be awesome if he had a name, but it looks like the artist specifically denies that's what he's called (the moved blog post even has the filename as "MrWiz.jpg", so if we disregard what the creators say and consider filenames as canon, would his full name be "Mr Wizzy Wiz"?).

I propose the article is moved back to an "Unidentified" title, the final "Behind the scenes" bullet be updated (and maybe the second now that "most likely" doesn't really apply), and the etymology removed. --xensyriaT 20:46, February 22, 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Looking at the picture more closely, it also seems to me he's wearing a white shirt, orange waistcoat, pale yellow and maroon striped trousers and a plum coat (perhaps someone could track down the specific type of overcoat) with turquoise lapels, and I'm sure we can try to describe the hat (not quite a Phrygian cap...), shoes and scarf (could it be called a cravat despite the tassels, and is it really scarlet and gold?); there's even a hint of an equally plum belt beneath the waistcoat! --xensyriaT 20:46, February 22, 2013 (UTC)

I'd have to agree. It seems clear that this was never intended as any sort of actual name. My vote is yes, move back to being "Unidentified." ProfessorTofty (talk) 21:21, February 22, 2013 (UTC)
Unless there is any objection, I will move this back to being "Unidentified" within the next day or two. ProfessorTofty (talk) 04:21, March 8, 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I agree; as nice a name as Wizzzy is, if it isn't canon, it'll have to go. Hunnie Bunn! 12:06, March 8, 2013 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki