Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels/Harry Potter task force

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Novels / Harry Potter (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by Harry Potter task force.

Discussion at Talk:Deathly Hallows#Direct[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Deathly Hallows#Direct. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 23:52, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

The potions have reapparated![edit]

I was refreshing myself on the differences between the Harry Potter houses when I came upon the article Hogwarts staff, which linked to Felix Felicis; I tried to find out what that was, but the link was broken. It turns out that it was because of this edit by Chaheel Riens. Frankly, I think it was sheer insanity to make this information inaccessible to almost everyone ...the vast majority of readers of Wikipedia don't even know about the page history function (also see this discussion). To this end, I have created Potions of Harry Potter, which was copied from the removed text at Magical objects in Harry Potter, and I've fixed as many redirects as I could find, plus a few links. As I said in an edit summary, I don't care much about Harry Potter, but I do care a lot about broken links. Graham87 05:09, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

I approve - well done. There was talk of creating a page for potions some time back, but it obviously never happened. I'm not sure I agree about your comment of my removal being "sheer insanity" - they were in the wrong place plain and simple.
I've added the page to my watchlist, and will also help & contribute to it as we go along. Chaheel Riens (talk) 05:51, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I don't think your removal was sheer insanity (I don't really have any opinion one way or the other on it). The only part that I think was sheer insanity was the fact that the info about the potions was gone for nearly two and a half years. Graham87 07:49, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't approve. This is a 1600 word wall of unreferenced text that is being presented in an in-universe manner. Further, it violates WP:INDISCRIMINATE. This article either needs to be (a) deleted or (b) dramatically re-written to turn it into an Wikipedia encyclopedic article. What is in this 'article' is appropriate for the Harry Potter Wikia. Not here. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:43, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Chaheel Riens: On further inspection...this article could be speedily deleted right now. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Potions in Harry Potter. You guys better act quick. Re-integrating the text back into Magical objects in Harry Potter isn't the solution. It's not the location of the material that is the problem, but the material itself. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:49, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Yet, the content here is unreferenced and written in-universe. Reading the AfD, there were precious few resources from secondary sources to support a stand alone article. I doubt that's changed. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:22, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The creation of this article was reverted by Lord Opeth; I've put it back. We really really shouldn't have broken links. Graham87 13:20, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm with Hammersoft and I don't approve the recreation of the article. It is presented in an in-universe way, the subject itself has not proven Notability outside the HP franchise, and no real world content has been added to the article. I think that the best way to present this information is in a "Potion brewing" section in the Magic in Harry Potter article, in text format and not list, and all links must redirect there. --LoЯd ۞pεth 17:40, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

  • And I disagree with it being turned back into an article after it was turned into a redirect. You can fix broken links. This is still an unreferenced wall of text, and suffers the same problems as the original article that was deleted, even if they're not precisely the same format. Forcing the article into existence isn't the solution. It's been two weeks since the issue of it failing encyclopedic standards has been raised. In that time, only this set of edits happened, which is essentially adding internal links. The solution most decidedly isn't adding links. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:45, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
    • In any case we can get rid of both the article and the redirects and broken links, or add some real world content to this Potion Brewing section. I think that something similar must be done with the Spells article, which is also a list of pure fancruft with no real world content. --LoЯd ۞pεth 17:51, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Along with Quidditch as you have seen, which blurs the line between fantasy and reality. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:44, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
        • But Quidditch has impact in the real world, the problem is the article itself. But these lists of potions and spells are not notable at all, these subjects can be covered in the Magic in Harry Potter article, written in an encyclopedic way. --LoЯd ۞pεth 21:16, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Discussion alert[edit]

Please see Talk:Quidditch#In-universe.2C_time_to_get_real. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:20, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

The Cursed Child and navigation template[edit]

I can't see why Harry Potter and the Cursed Child should be excluded from Template:Harry Potter, it was removed by User:Lord Opeth with the edit summary "Musicals and other derived works are not included in this template." was this discussed and were? and if this is true, shouldnt all topoics under related works also be removed and that line suppressed.--KTo288 (talk) 09:37, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

The Related Works section in the template is for other books written by Rowling plus Pottermore. There are lots of musicals and other derived works that are not canon and not included in the template. Perhaps The Curse Child and all of those works can be included in a "Derived works" section. --LoЯd ۞pεth 21:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
If its a canon, non-canon thing, fan work vs official, it looks as if The Curse Child will be canon, Rowling is after all putting her name to the production, though how much of the final product is hers, remains to be seen,--KTo288 (talk) 15:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Attention: Potions in Harry Potter will be placed for AfD on June 4, 2016[edit]

In November of 2007 Potions in Harry Potter was deleted as a the result of a deletion discussion due to its failure of WP:FICT, WP:PLOT, WP:WAF, and other issues. On June 4, 2015 the article was recreated from content then currently existing on the Magical objects in Harry Potter article. A discussion followed regarding the appropriateness of the recreation. An attempt was made to return this article to a redirect, which was undone a day later. Some months later, a notice was placed on the article's talk page indicating the article would be placed for deletion. A few days ago, the article was placed for proposed deletion. This too was undone.

Throughout the history of the article, which spans more than a decade, it has never had any references. It has always been written in in-universe style. No outside universe perspective has ever been provided. As of June 2016, it will have been tagged for both of these problems for a year. I have asked, begged, and pleaded with people to rewrite this article to no avail. As the article stands (and has always stood), it continues to fail WP:FICT, WP:PLOT, and WP:WAF. There have been suggestions to merge the content back to Magical objects in Harry Potter, but this completely fails to address the failures noted. Where the content exists, either in its own article or as part of another, matters not. The issue is the content itself.

Barring a massive rewrite of the entire article into something that is encyclopedic in its treatment of the subject, I will be placing it for deletion on June 4, 2016. This notice is being sent as a last ditch attempt to find one or more people willing to do something to fix the serious problems extant in this content. Thank you for your attention, --Hammersoft (talk) 17:19, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

  • Done. Please, those of you who are fans of HP do not just vote keep because you are a fan of HP. We're an encyclopedia, not a Wikia host. HP has a wikia. We're not it. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:18, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Category:Harry Potter in the real world has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Harry Potter in the real world, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for upmerging to Category:Harry Potter. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:47, 25 May 2016 (UTC)