Talk:Hermione Granger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Hermione Granger was one of the Language and literature good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Novels / Harry Potter (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Harry Potter task force (marked as Top-importance).
 
WikiProject Children's literature (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Fictional characters (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 

Pictures[edit]

There's only one picture in here. I seem to remember, however, that there were a number of very good images in here, e. g. where Hermione was wearing the beautiful dress from the Yule Ball. Where have they all gone??? Deleting such beautiful and important pictures was an act of vandalism!!! --Krawunsel (talk) 12:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Does no one have an answer? --Krawunsel (talk) 18:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Well I'm not sure what the pictures were or where they went but 9 times out of 10 the reason pictures are removed is because they violate copyright laws. Perhaps that is why they were removed. Darkage7 (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
We could, however, put some pictures that are in accordance with the wiki policy. Just my two pence. BlackPearl14Pirate Lord-ess 23:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
One of the criteria for fair use is that they qualify as minimal use. There needs to be a justification for why each image adds significantly to the article. I think the picture of her from the Ball would be acceptable because it was notable that her appearance was dramatically different in that scene. For An Angel (talk) 18:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


I think it DOES need more photos and pictures. Like the comment above, the pic with Hermione in the Yule Ball dress would be a nice one. It's sad how there's only one picture, and it's not exactly the most detailed, describing picture ever... it needs to show Hermione's personality, style, expressions. Also the setting of the photo: it's all blue, what does that say? That she lives in a blue light? The photo should include the setting of the Hugwarts castle. One more thing, Hermione was in the 6th year in that picture. Emma Watson changes alot over the years, so there should be some sort of Hermione Granger evolution section, where it shows how much she's changed. Good idea, right? :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.68.23.33 (talk) 05:20, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

The pictures don't show Hermione doing anything, they show an actress portraying her. The Harry Potter articles are really poor at separating the book characters from the film characters, and the film characters from the actors. GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 06:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Ah, yes, that old problem. IMHO we should keep pictures from the movie into a section on adaptations, like we do on Tolkien articles. Double sharp (talk) 14:29, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
The pictures would show an actress in the movie representation, while this article is about the character itself, originally described in the book. To keep thing neutral between book and movie, it's best to avoid pictures (for those who read the books but didn't see the movie, the actress would have no relation to the character, for example). HuGo_87 (talk) 14:08, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Little girl category[edit]

This seems an appropriate category, as she is in fact a little girl. For the majority of the books, she is under age of 18, which qualifies her as a girl. We are not using the end point of the stories to determine her article's content; we are using the largest portion of her fictionally notable life. Were that not true, the discussions about her and Ron's sexuality (or Krum's for that matter) would have continued on unabated, rather than being closed for discussion as inappropriate. As well, the name of the article is Hermione Granger, not Granger-Weasley or simply Hermione Weasley - that imparts that the greater part of why we know about her is because the books cover a sizable portion of her childhood. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd be okay with it going either way, mainly because I'm worried that if we argue too much about it then it will just get deleted and then become a nonissue. (See: here) My opinion however is that she does belong in the category because she is most notable as a child and is an adult only in the epiloge of the last book. For An Angel (talk) 18:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I respectfully disagree. My problem is in the wording of the name of the category. What exactly does 'little girl' mean? What are the criteria? Are we talking about physical stature or age? Obviously age, but it isn't clear enough, IMO. And at what age does one stop being a little girl? Perhaps because at the age of 24, I'm not too far removed from my teenage years, but I have never thought of teenagers as being little girls, I think of my eight-year-old niece as a little girl, but I wouldn't consider a high school freshman a little girl. For me, the term is for roughly ten-year-olds and under. This all seems moot, as the category looks headed for deletion. As an aside, I could support the recreation of the deleted 'Fictional children' category, but the criteria for inclusion in this one is just far too vague. faithless (speak) 18:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree that it was a poor choice of words for the category. I meant "little girl" to mean "female child" and hopefully if the category doesn't get deleted at the CfD they will rename it to that. For An Angel (talk) 19:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Faithless, Little Girl is really for "little" girls and not teenagers which she is in six books out of seven considering in the wizarding world that 17 is the day you become an adult. A little girl should be considered as people in Primary school, not in secondary schools in other words, Hogwarts. Hermione Granger is no little girl, she is a teenager and in the final book she is in adult. Jammy (talk) 19:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
In retrospect, so do I. 'Little girl' is too vague. If there is a category for fictional teenagers, then the article (as well as many others) would fit in it. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
If the category gets renamed to Category:Fictional female children would it then be okay to include her? Consider that the already established Category:Children states its only for "articles about individuals who became notable as children (before age 18)." For An Angel (talk) 21:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I also respectfully disagree. Hermione is is not way, or in no way was a little girl, in many aspects, she was a yonug woman and for the majority of the book a pre-teen or a teenager. When I think little girl, I would assume under 11. Plus, little girl seems "degrading" to the character. We all know Hermione was more then a normal girl, and more than other girls in the Harry Potter world. Hahen Bougetsu (talk) 11:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

"little Girl" is a purely subjective term and, I would suggest, irrelevant to the article. I have two nieces, one 17, one 15. The oldest is very much a mature young woman (mentally and physically), while the younger (by just under two years) is very much a "very, very, little girl." To suggest Hermione/Emma is one or the other based only on calender dates fails to take into account that all people mature at differing rates. The character of Hermione is very mature for her age mentally, and that I think is the point. She is a wise head on young shoulders. The fact that it takes the character (not the actress) a few more years to mature physically is part of the story. She had to grow her shoulders to catch up with her head. Fortunately Miss Watson was able to act the part, and mature on screen in line with the character. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.151.90.204 (talk) 16:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Good Article[edit]

The article doesn't bear the "Good Article" icon (at the top right) and such, it's only mentioned here in the talk page. I'd do the edit myself, but I don't know how to. -- AvatarMN (talk) 02:07, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I don' think there is a Good Article icon. I've searched though several at Wikipedia:Good_articles and haven't come across any that do. HuGo_87 (talk) 03:08, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Tales of Beedle and the Bard[edit]

Why no mention of Hermione as translator of the book, or even a mention of the book. It played such a key role in the HP series. Also in TBB there is a hint that Hermione is descended from a Wizard. Tuyvan (talk) 21:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I've read TBB quite a few times now, and I haven't seen a hint that she is descended from a wizard. Or am I missing something? --71.28.212.32 (talk) 17:10, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

What's TBB —Preceding unsigned comment added by XX EOIN XX (talkcontribs) 18:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


BTW, TBB is Tales of Beedle the Bard. I honestly didn't catch that part about Hermione being descended from a wizard. So, if nobody caught that little part, TBB shouldn't be mentioned in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.68.23.33 (talk) 05:15, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Hermione Gingold[edit]

Anybody have a source for the London stage actress Hermione Gingold, who also played the witch in the film "Winter of the Witch" as well as "Munsters Go Home" and other movies being homaged by Miss Rowling with Hermione's name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.18.128.22 (talk) 07:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Since Rowling took the name from a character in Shakespeare's The Winter's Tale, I would guess that no, no one has such a source. :-) faithless (speak) 07:32, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Hermione Gingold was once noted for her wild hair, which may qualify her to be an ancestor of Hermione Granger. NRPanikker (talk) 14:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
It does nothing of the sort. GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 15:06, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Article Accuracy[edit]

In the US version of the film (and books) "Chamber of Secrets", she DOES know what mudblood means. It is Harry that does not. The sentence in the article that states the opposite needs correction. 199.244.214.30 (talk) 17:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

No, not in the books. The Wikipedia article is correct as it relates what's in the books ArthurWeasley (talk) 17:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
She does not know what mudblood means, she "knew" or could understand it was a derogatory name but not for what. I don't think we need to include the films awful swtiching of Ron's comments of knowledge to Hermione. chandler ··· 18:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


Relationships[edit]

The relationships section is not fancruft - it's a significant aspect of the novels (at least from 5 upwards). It is one of the biggest characterisations of the character possible. Without it, the article becomes, to my mind, short and dull. Grieferhate (talk) 16:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

What to do[edit]

Quoting this good article reassesment, I'm going to see what we need to do to make GA. The revision then was: this. The revision when made GA-class is this.

  • Comprehensiveness: The article is better than most Harry Potter bios in that it does have a section on critical analysis, but there's next to nothing on critical reception in general and the analysis section needs more opinions and expansion.
The appearances section can be cut down dramatically, increasing clarity, as can the 'attributes' section (and reworking the arrangement of the sections may help in readability as well.)
Yes check.svg Done, these were removed.
There's no major critical commentary about Lohan's portrayal or Emma Watson's early appearance.
Doing... I'll look up early reviews on Emma Watson at her article. As for Lohan, I doubt there'll be anything. However, we could explain how she was portrayed, which differed from the real Hermione very much (see this).
  • References: Spell out the books instead of using esoteric templates, and use page numbers instead of vague chapters.
This is going to take a lot of work. I'm an American and own the Scholastic editions, of which the page numbers vary. Will it count?

Working, --Glimmer721 talk 02:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 174.49.91.185, 22 February 2011[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}} You have the first Harry Potter movie name wrong. It's called the "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone". Please fix it, it makes the site look stupid

174.49.91.185 (talk) 01:23, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Not done. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone is the correct and original title. It was changed for the United States to appeal to more readers. ICYTIGER'SBLOOD 02:42, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Actors from A Very Potter Musical[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Talk:Harry Potter (character)#Darren Criss about whether or not to include those who portrayed him in A Very Potter Musical. It appears there is a concerted campaign by anon editors to add the 'Very Potter' actors to Harry Potter-related articles. We need to reach a consensus on this quickly. Please discuss. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 20:44, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Against it - we don't list the baby who portrayed Harry when Hagrid delivered him to the Dursleys, or in any of the flashback scenes. The role of Harry is intrinsically linked to Daniel Radcliffe. (C&P from talk page.) a_man_alone (talk) 20:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Please keep the conversation centralized at Talk:Harry Potter (character)#Darren Criss because these edits are taking place across various articles in the Harry Potter project. Elizium23 (talk) 20:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Already done - I saw it here first though, hecne the (C&P from talk page.) - although I should have clarified I meant the Harry Potter talk page. a_man_alone (talk) 20:53, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry about that - I just saw it now. Thanks :) Elizium23 (talk) 20:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

OWLS[edit]

Hermione recieves 11 owls not 10. I corrected it just now, but i dont have a source, just my copy of HBP which i just checked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Potter349 (talkcontribs) 10:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

The book is a perfectly acceptable source, just add it as a source. Plenty of articles use non-online references. 181.28.145.177 (talk) 18:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Ravenclaw[edit]

The statement that the sorting hat almost put her in Ravenclaw in itself does not explain its relevence to the paragraph it is in - I suspect that if the reader knew anything about Hogwarts it would, but if I knew all about it, I wouldn't be reading this Page.

IceDragon64 (talk) 00:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

It does seem odd just dumped there in the middle of real-world analysis of the character. I've removed it for now - if someone wants to rewrite it and explain how 'nearly being sorted into ravenclaw' feel free. GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 07:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

In Boook 1, Chapter 7, Moment 2 of Pottermore [1], J.K. Rowling reveals that Hermione was alomst a hatstall (at four minutes) between Gryffindor and Ravenclaw, just like McGonagall and Flitwick before her. I think that it should be re-added to character analysis. ~~Tra~~ 13:51, 31 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.62.197 (talk)

References

Hermione Granger example to children[edit]

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Children are decided. Their film example is Hermione Granger. Intelligence, courage, and a strong work ethic are the main characteristics of the best friend of Harry Potter that have made the smartest student at Hogwarts won in the poll among British children whose results were published these days, writing the world's media transmits Croatian daily Glas Slavonia. Except that it always has a ready answer to the professor's question and every problem you can not find a logical solution, and know-it-all Hermione's love problems specialist, writes in the explanation of the survey results.78.2.90.230 (talk) 17:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Source? Glimmer721 talk 22:18, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Dentists[edit]

The fact about Hermione's parents being dentists is already in the article, which is why I did not revert and provide a source. That source might be Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows or Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone chapter 12. Elizium23 (talk) 01:04, 8 December 2014 (UTC)