I'm wondering if the FAMILY part should be in lowercase as all the other family articles are. Mafalda Hopkirk 04:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
If it's a title, it should still be capitalized, at least on the top of the web-page. However, in the actual article, capitalizing it is debatable. 22.214.171.124 03:30, March 15, 2010 (UTC)Naomi
They are not a pureblood wizarding family anymore, technically.
Bill Weasley married a halfblood quarter-veela. We know from the epilogue in book seven that Ronald Weasley married Hermione, a Muggle-born. Ginny married a half-blood, Harry Potter. So I am going to change this article a bit.
Do we have a preference to have wiki styled trees (see Potter) or for images (see House of Black). Recently the wiki family tree was removed to be replaced with the hand drawn JKR image. Which is fine to have, but I think the Wiki Tree has important elements that this image does not have. So, do we think it would be too much info to add it back or does anyone have other thoughts on this? -- DarkJedi613 (Talk) 17:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe some of our most image-talented contributors could create a jpeg family tree based on the new info? I'm having a bash at the moment, but meeting limited success. - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 11:05, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- A family tree can be made using line-drawing characters. It's a bit of manual work, but it should look good. (See Potter family for a family tree I've just reworked). But I think Wikimedia has built-in software for generating an HTML-based family tree, doesn't it? Wikipedia's got nice family trees which can be created and edited in a shot. --Draco Bonfoy 18:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
I've noticed one issue with the family tree made up for the site. It labels the children of Harry and Ginny as being 'quarter-blood'. It seems to be more that they would be 'three quarter blood' as their mother is over a 'pure blood' family. Also, I thought half-bloods were people with a wizarding parent and a muggle parent. As such, Harry does not qualify under that definition. --Donovan Ravenhull 21:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, looking over the 'blood purity' page, Harry would be a 'half-blood', but his children would be considered full bloods because neither of thier parents were muggle/muggle-born. --Donovan Ravenhull 21:32, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
That bit of text at the bottom
"JK Rowling reveals in an interview that George Weasley marries Lavender Brown not Angelina Johnson."
...Joke, right? 126.96.36.199 11:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Due to a matter brought up by Harrypotterroxs, I would like to note that the family tree image is symbol and colored coded. One of the notes is incorrect, as there is no such thing as "Three-Quarter Blood". The offspring labeled this are considered Pure-blood. A notice might be needed here.-Matoro183 (Talk - Jimmy Fincher talk) 23:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
- I have removed the image for now. I'll have a bash at amending it/ creating a new one sometime in the next few days, unless anyone else wants to have a go? - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 23:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Weasley Family Members
Why is Hermione in a different section to Harry when they're both Weasley Relatives not Other Weasley.ThanksSpell Master- Long live Optimus Prime 09:03, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I read the changes made to the article of the Weasley family and I found the following mistakes:
- Mark Williams, who portrays Arthur Weasley in all film adaptations. No, he did not play in the first film adaptation.
- Julie Walters, who portrays Molly Weasley in all film adaptations. No, she did not play in the fourth film adaptation.
- Chris Rankin who portrays Percy Weasley. Percy did not appear in the Goblet of Fire film. There is only a missing. He also did not appear in the Half-Blood Prince film. Harry granger 19:56, July 24, 2010 (UTC)
Why is it that in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, the Weasley's are so poor that they only have one galleon and less than 17 sickles which would be a maximum of $19.55 in U.S. dollars or 9.71 UK pounds. But in Harry Potter and the Prizoner of Azkaban they win 700 galleons ($7,049) they use most of it on a trip. I think that there is no way that the Weasley's are poor enough to have less than $20 in their vault.
Possible explanation: The Weasley are sued 10 galleons for the Flying Car so the might have had more like $120 dollars before. But they weren't fined that until afterwards, so it makes no sense as they would be in debt. In Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets GBC video game, two cannon steps down. Ron withdraws the enitre vault and recieves 70 sickles, which is more than the book states.
My final theory is the JKR had not concieved Galleons to be worth more, its not a huge inconsistancy but its worth bring up I think.