Talk:Harry Potter: Difference between revisions

; Archives
	Talk:Harry Potter/Archives 1-10; 9 December 2007 - 1 January 2008; 1 January 2008 - 27 April 2008; 27 April 2008 - 16 November 2008; 16 November 2008- 10 May 2010;

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 15:56, 23 November 2010

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Harry Potter article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

Module:WikiProject banner/doc
This page is a soft redirect.

Skip to table of contents

Harry Potter has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 27, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
October 7, 2006	Good article reassessment	Delisted
January 23, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
June 29, 2006	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
June 1, 2007	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
July 28, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed
March 8, 2008	Good article nominee	Not listed
April 13, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
August 2, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
September 22, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
October 4, 2008	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
April 18, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
May 16, 2010	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
June 18, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
Current status: Good article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Template:WPHP

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Children's literature GA‑class Top‑importance

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.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles

GA

This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks you can do:

Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks.

Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles.
Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}}
Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project.
Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature
Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject.
References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs.
Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature
Stubs: Improve a stub-class article

edit

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Novels: Fantasy GA‑class High‑importance

	Novels portal 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, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fantasy task force.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Hill, Greg (2007-07-30 ^{[dead link]}). "Translating Harry Potter to support the governing ideology in Iran". Fairbanks Daily News. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Harry Potter. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Harry Potter at the Reference desk.

OWL-levels

Surely they shouldn't be referred to as OWL-levels, because OWL stands for Ordinary Wizarding Levels, so OWL-levels is Ordinary Wizarding Levels levels. They are just OWLs. George.millman (talk) 17:18, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LEGO Harry Potter

There should be a link under the Games section at least mentioning Lego Harry Potter.

Done--Birkenburg (talk) 16:43, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TYPO IN CONTROVERSIES SECTION

"The newspaper created a new children's section covering children's sections...." Should read "The newspaper created a new children's section covering children's books...." 76.90.10.191 (talk) 07:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will do! --Philcha (talk) 18:34, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit updates

Since the June 30, 1997 release of the first novel Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, retitled Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in the United States, the books have gained immense popularity,'. I have updated the entry to read 'Since the June 30, 1997 release of the first novel Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, (retitled Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in the United States) the books have gained immense popularity,'. Putting brackets around 'retitled Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in the United States' as it should be.Twobells (talk) 09:34, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Best Practice

I don't understand why criticism has been worked into the second paragraph of the main article AND has it's own section? Seems a little npov.Twobells (talk) 09:56, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and came to this discussion with the intention of making a similar point. I suspect the two odd-looking references to criticism in the introduction probably come from persons with some sort of misplaced agenda (any ideas what?). From my incidental observation of the mainstream views of the series, the broad consensus view is a more healthy one that the (junior or otherwise) audience for fantasy fiction can make up their own minds as to how well it fits its purpose of entertainment, and it is simply misguided to judge it as something else. In my opinion, minority critism of the series does not justify any mention in a short introductory section, but it is reasonable to include it in a small sub-section. My impression is that the negative criticism (reported in the article as appearing after the fifth novel) must to some extent be a response to the series' status as the most successful ever (a reflection of the views of its readership). I consider my own views on these points as being fairly neutral as I have not completed any of the novels, and consider myself a few decades too old to accurately judge their quality. :-) Elroch (talk) 23:35, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sirius Black

There should be two changes for the Harry Potter page about Sirius Black. First, in the section of the page telling the plot of the third book, it should be said that Black is Harry's only living relative, as he is his god-father, and is very important to Harry. The second change should be in the section of the page telling the fifth book's plot, about Black dieing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.29.245 (talk) 18:16, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misprint

Hey just so you know, on the right side near the top when the series is listed, Harry Potter 1: is the SORCERER'S stone, not "PHILOSOPHER" haha not sure how that came up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.82.80.37 (talk) 16:43, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the United Kingdoms, where the Harry Potter books were first written and published, the name of the first book IS Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. It became Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone when published in the United States. Yiosie2356 (talk) 19:19, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well technically since this is the American article it should be the American version.-unsigned

@@ Line 160: / Line 160: @@
 Hey just so you know, on the right side near the top when the series is listed, Harry Potter 1: is the SORCERER'S stone, not "PHILOSOPHER" haha not sure how that came up  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.82.80.37|68.82.80.37]] ([[User talk:68.82.80.37|talk]]) 16:43, 15 November 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 :In the [[United Kingdoms]], where the Harry Potter books were first written and published, the name of the first book IS ''Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone.'' It became ''Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone'' when published in the [[United States]]. [[User:Yiosie2356|Yiosie2356]] ([[User talk:Yiosie2356|talk]]) 19:19, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
-: Well technically since this is the American article it should be the American version.
+:Well technically since this is the American article it should be the American version.-unsigned