Talk:Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2

This article is named Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2 as mirrored within the copyright text of the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 1 Blu-ray case. Please do not move this article. Hallows Horcruxes 08:16, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

That might be true but why wasn't the move log used. And if the redirection already existed we should have requested it to a administrator. It's all good though I have made mistakes like that in the past and I am requesting an administrator to handle it. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 14:03, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Alright the history is restored. I appreciate your edits so far. :) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I feel this article should be combined with the first film. After all, Kill Bill is listed as a single article despite being released in two parts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GabeRodriguez (talk • contribs) 15:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Cast List

The cast section of this article seems to be growing bigger and bigger despite the fact that there is already a list of Harry Potter cast members. There have been attempts to change this, however I'm concerned that it still doesn't adhere to the section on cast lists of the film manual of style . I would like to try and establish some sort of consensus here on whether there should be a cast list and if so, what should the requirements be in order to prevent any future conflict. --Mrmatiko (talk) 15:30, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Initial proposal: My suggestion would be the inclusion of significant characters that only appear in this film with the link to the main List of Harry Potter cast members article remaining at the top of the section so that people can find other characters who appear in the other films as well as this one. It seems unnecessary to include every character who appears in the film when there is already a list of all cast members throughout the series, especially since so many edits seem to be adding more characters. --Mrmatiko (talk) 19:31, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok then. So specifically what are the recommendations that you purpose so far? Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 19:02, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I've now added a proposal under the original comment. --Mrmatiko (talk) 19:31, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

What is the limit with the main cast? Who do you think should go and who shouldn't. I actually thought there was a consensus done with this with all the films a while back. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 19:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

If there is already a consensus then that would be better than any suggestion that I could make. I‛ll take a look for it later. Thanks for pointing it out. --Mrmatiko (talk) 20:04, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

After looking at the talk pages for all the other films, I can see that the cast list issue has been discussed at least once, if not multiple times on each of them. I can't see any clear consensus even on the part 1 talk page where there are at least 5 discussions on the cast list. It would probably be better to wait until the cast list has actually stabilised (after the film has been released) before trying to do anything about it, though I suspect there will be cast list edit wars until then. Mrmatiko (talk) 08:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I have found the official cast list here. (It's up on the page now, sourced. However, my sourcing is poor - feel free to correct it!) The link is here: http://harrypotter.warnerbros.com/harrypotterandthedeathlyhallows/hp7b/index.html in the About the Movie section, where it lists the current version of the main cast. Evil Genius77 (talk) 14:10, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

The big thing about the cast list that I'm not sure about is the descriptions - they seem rather poorly worded and for some characters provide plot points that aren't strictly relevant or necessary, and may well be viewed as spoilers for people wishing only to find out who's in the film, not what happens in it. For example, "the film's main protagonist" is surely enough for Harry Potter; " the film's main protagonist. Later on, father of Ginny's children, James, Lily,and Albus" seems like overkill. I've edited it to give all characters in the description capital letters, but I'd rather scrap the extraneous material altogether. Thoughts? 78.109.188.61 (talk) 11:51, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Spoilers

Spoilers: Should there really be in so many spoilers in the cast page before the movie comes out? I guess most people have read the book but still. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.194.121.154 (talk) 15:25, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Spoilers are covered by the content disclaimer and the policy on spoilers, with a detailed cast list this is inevitable. --Mrmatiko (talk) 16:05, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Part 2 Poster.

I would like to remind everyone that the only official poster for the film to date is the current one on the main Part 2 page. (Harry and Voldemort holding the elder wand) Until Warner Brothers release the final official poster, then we should update it, cause right now, users continue to upload new character banners each time, citing them as the official posters, when they are not. B.Davis2003 (talk) 05:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

There's no 'official poster'; just shit-loads showing all sorts of characters. However, the one with Harry and Voldemort facing off is probably the most appropriate given that they're the two main characters. raseaC^{talk to me} 19:08, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree, thats why I continue to revert the edits made to the poster, back to the Harry and Voldemort poster. Is there in protection we can put on that section until the final poster is released? B.Davis2003 (talk) 04:48, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

It might be best to request semi-protection until the film is release on July 15. The running-time keeps being changed too from a properly sourced value. It won't stop all the bad edits, but most of them are coming from IP editors. Betty Logan (talk) 09:29, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, probably worth requesting semi-protection until all the 'well-meaning' fans find another film to get hard over. raseaC^{talk to me} 19:59, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good, too many editors continue to change the Poster and runtime, not to mention the cast list :/ B.Davis2003 (talk) 05:41, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't get it. There are some other websites believing that the poster with Harry, Ron and Hermione is the official poster, but this one says that Harry and Voldemort is the official poster, why can't we think that the Harry, Ron and Hermione poster to be the official poster than the other websites like IMDB, Box Office Mojo and Rotten Tomatoes? Unless, there can a poster featuring Harry, Ron and Hermione with credits hidden someone on the internet. Ceauntay59 (talk) 04:12, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Check out Internet Movie Database, Box Office Mojo and Rotten Tomatoes for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2. Do they think that the Harry, Ron and Hermione to be the official poster is a lie? I just want to know which poster is the official one when there is no title and billing blocks in it, just pictures and release date :( Ceauntay59 (talk) 04:15, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

There's no such thing as an 'official poster'.raseaC^{talk to me} 17:39, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I think this is the poster that you are looking for; it has the credits at the end: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=media&img=33494&id=harrypotter72.htm and its displayed on both boxofficemojo and rottentomatoes--Eddyghazaley (talk) 18:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

That poster has to be the final and current one... Please don't change back the harry and voldemort poster because that's done for... This may look the same like the other poster featuring characters, but this one has billing blocks and title in it. Ceauntay59 (talk) 00:01, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Even the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 from Harry Potter wiki has the same poster but without the credits and title. Why can't we just let the other poster to be the main one currently? Ceauntay59 (talk) 00:48, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the poster and caption for now, we need to determine which one is the official final one, and then semi protect it, along with the caption. B.Davis2003 (talk) 01:32, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

The Harry and Voldemort poster is back! Ceauntay59 (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

The current poster is NOT the theatrical poster. The Harry-Ron-Hermione is the one, which is being used for this purpose. It has the title of the film as well the credits displayed. The Harry-Voldemort poster is just one of the numerous promotional posters that we have for the film. IMDB, Box Office Mojo and Rotten Tomatoes uses Harry-Ron-Hermione as the main poster, so why do we have to be different? Decodet (talk) 19:18, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Someone should change the poster to the Harry-Ron-Hermione poster because it has the title, the credits and the main characters. The rest are just teaser posters including the Harry-Voldemort poster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.235.78.208 (talk) 19:40, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

It will be changed to the poster most likely soon, maybe once the film is released, in the meantime, can we semi protect this section!? B.Davis2003 (talk) 01:26, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I amended it to read 'Official US poster'. Due to the American date format (7.15 instead of 15.7) this poster couldn't be used in any other country. (I'm not weighing in on the topic of whether or not it is THE official poster or not.) Manning (talk) 04:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Someone has since changed it to 'Teaser' poster. I don't know the truth, however this is definitely a 'USA only' poster, so keep that aspect in, no matter what else you call it. Manning (talk) 05:38, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I changed the poster again to the closest official poster, and it even is being used as the main poster in the most popular sites as stated above, if someone wants to change it again, please discuss it. Afterall, why is this page called discussion. --Eddyghazaley (talk) 20:41, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

VOTE

Ok, personally, I am getting really tired of reverting the poster back and forth ect. Since no one has acted on suggestions of making the Poster section smi protected, I think it's time to get down and just pick one of the posters.

Under each poster please say "YES" (opinions are fine) Ok?

Poster 1: Voldemort and Harry, holding the Elder Wand.

NO

Poster 2: Good Trio, with battle of Hogwarts behind them.

I have only seen the trio poster in the theaters that I have visited. The first one was just a teaser poster, I am certain of that. So I would go with the "Good Trio" poster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbr1656 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

The "Good Trio" poster appears to be the only full poster, with the credits at the bottom. There have been dozens of others but I agree that they appear to be teaser posters. I would use the full poster with credits for Part 2, just like the Part 1 page has that film film's full poster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.234.169.189 (talk) 02:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

The Trio poster is definitely the main poster, for everything said above. I don't even know why we're having this voting since there's a whole discussion above and the majority agrees with the Trio poster. Decodet (talk) 02:33, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

YES. 71.96.8.139 (talk) 03:28, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

YES

YES, so can we put poster 2 now since there is no one on the other-side, and if the votes for poster 1 were somehow going to increase then we could change it. --Eddyghazaley (talk) 08:09, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you B.Davis2003 (talk) 01:48, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

dear B.Davis2003 if the vote is for Poster 2, why do you keep reverting it back to poster 1?

@ABOVE COMMENT, Some other editors thought it was the right poster too, so I therefore went along with their discussions, but now, since no one is acting, thought I would. B.Davis2003 (talk) 06:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I dont mind that we change it, but before that, a higher quality version of that poster must be in place, the one users are uploading is cropped too much, and is pixelated, please find a clearer poster first before uploading. Thamks guys for your co operation! B.Davis2003 (talk) 08:21, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I uploaded a better version. --DisneyFriends (talk) 14:26, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments

I'm slightly concerned about the number of "Do not do (x)" comments that have been added to the article. They seem to be phrased in a way that violates the policy on comments. --Mrmatiko (talk) 20:43, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree that this is a cause for concern. I count 10 hidden instructions in the article: 2 "don't change the poster", 1 "don't add rumors", 1 "only list composer (not orchestrator, conductor)", 1 "don't change runtime", 1 spelling instruction, 3 "don't expand cast list", and 1 about the country.

This last is the only one that links to consensus, which is requested in the policy to which you linked. Above on this talk page, I see discussions of the poster and cast list, but I don't see a really strong statement of consensus in either discussion, which makes the presence of hidden comments for the poster and cast list more questionable.

I think some of the comments are probably okay. HP articles always have issues with people changing British spelling they think is misspelled (falling under the "existing policy" exception of the comment policy), and the runtime appears to have been frequently changed from a sourced value to an unsourced value, so the comment there seems to be called for, although linking to the talk page would be nice. Also, the composer one is an explanation of what is expected in the infobox. As for "do not add rumours", that is no longer necessary now that Desplat is confirmed as composer and I will go remove it.

Do any of the editors who have a bit more invested in the poster and cast list as they now stand know of a discussion to which we could link in those hidden comments? I agree with Mrmatiko that since there is not an "existing policy" that I know of that rules out editing the poster and the cast list, that these five hidden instructions are problematic and it would be better if they linked to a talk-page consensus on the topic. Princess Lirin (talk) 00:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

No Full "Plot" Story Until Movie Is Out

Someone has already typed a full "plot" story about the movie before its out in theaters on July 15... That can cause major spoilers... Just hold on to your comments if you have already seen the movie. I already removed the full "plot" story right now. If they continue to write a full story before its out on July 15, please revert or undo them. :( thanks :) Ceauntay59 (talk) 23:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

If you're one of them, please stop. :( Ceauntay59 (talk) 23:32, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not concerned about spoilers here, what I'm concerned about is the likelihood of the plot typed in here actually matching up to the plot in the released movie, considering how far from the original source material some of the previous movies have gone. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:50, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

if the movie comes out in July 14, can it be finally typed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GastroTV (talk • contribs) 01:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

As soon the film becomes accessible to the general public—even if that is by advance screenings on July 14 that the public can attend—then a plot can be added. Spoilers don't come into it, the issue is WP:Verifiability. If you are using the film as a source for its own plot, then the film has to be publicly released for the source to be verifiable. Betty Logan (talk) 02:41, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

they added the full plot, even more than before! just warning — Preceding unsigned comment added by GastroTV (talk • contribs) 05:43, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Cleaned "Plot of the Novel" header to match that of Part 1. juan^less 23:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Cast

Any reason why Draco isn't included in the cast? Dylan (talk) 03:22, 4 July 2011 (UTC) I agree that Draco should be included in the cast. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 555legoboy555 (talk • contribs) 06:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Draco is definitely in the cast list. Manning (talk) 05:39, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Has this film received a rating yet? (e.g. Pg, pg13, etc.)

Hi. I apologize if this is somewhere in the article (I couldn't locate anything), but has a rating been established yet? Please add if it's not in article and the film has indeed received a rating--that is, if Wiki policy allows mention of it. Thanks, 67.182.237.57 (talk) 21:47, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

We don't document certificates because they vary from country to country. I recommend following the IMDB link at the bottom. Betty Logan (talk) 01:12, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense. That would be a headache and and an eyesore to list the rating for every single requested/required country in an already sufficiently long Wiki article--especially since that info is readily available at the IMDB link. Thanks for responding. I should have thought of that IMDB link to save you the trouble, but thanks for highlighting this policy for me. :) 67.182.237.57 (talk) 11:03, 9 July 2011 (UTC)