User talk:Chaheel Riens

	; Archives (Index) ;
	s/ am01am 1; 1;

Hermione

Hello!

I just wanted to give you a friendly heads-up that I made a change to the Hermione page that you might want to review. When you reverted a few of my edits recently, one of them was a header change. I made this edit again, but this time it wasn't by itself, but rather part of an effort to put all the appearances of the character into one section - novels, films and theatre. Please let me know if you find this edit acceptable. Thanks!

P.S. I didn't make any changes to citations, so all the changes listed must have happened automatically. Wafflewombat (talk) 20:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Canon

Hello again. I was hoping to speak with you about your assertion that Harry Potter and the Cursed Child is not canon. A quick Internet search reveals that Rowling has called it canon, although many fans wish that it wasn't. Here is one article about the topic.

Even if it wasn't canon, that doesn't mean it's not Ron's last appearance. Wikipedia takes a neutral point of view, so canonicity doesn't matter when documenting the appearance of a character. Wafflewombat (talk) 14:35, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And yet the article only covers up to the Deathly Hallows as an appearance. You're right - Wikipedia takes a neutral point of view which also covers not including a stage play in the list of novels/films. If you feel strongly enough about it, bring it up on the talk page, but it won't be the first time it's been brought up - nor I expect the last. Chaheel Riens (talk) 16:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Could you please explain how excluding the play from Appearances is a result of the neutral point of view policy?

Regarding the talk page, there is only one comment addressing this issue, in which two editors state that Cursed Child should be Ron's last appearance. If you oppose the change, I will not change it without discussion, but there is no history of opposition to it on the talk page. Wafflewombat (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Percy

Hey, I was hoping to talk with you about this edit. This sentence is subjective interpretation: "In direct contrast to his brothers, he is a stickler for rules and often pompous due to his love of authority, though he does have good intentions at heart." It's one editor's assessment of Percy's character and his intentions. If we are going to include this sentence we need to back it up with a reliable secondary source and provide attribution. An example might be, "In her book Characters of Harry Potter, author X describes Percy as a stickler for rules..." If appropriate quotes exist in the books we could say something like, "In Chamber of Secrets, Ron explains Percy's love of rules..."

Please let me know if this makes sense. Wafflewombat (talk) 14:19, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst I agree that sourcing is of course important, there's no reason to pick on that one sentence over all the others, especially when it's an overriding factor in Percy's depiction - albeit considerably downplayed in the films compared to the books:

“We’re trying to standardize cauldron thickness. Some of these foreign imports are just a shade too thin — leakages have been increasing at a rate of almost three percent a year ... but unless some sort of international law is imposed we might well find the market flooded with flimsy, shallow-bottomed products that seriously endanger..."
“I’ll come with you, Father,” said Percy importantly. “Mr. Crouch will need all hands on deck. And I can give him my cauldron report in person.”
Harry could see at once why Percy idolized him. Percy was a great believer in rigidly following rules, and Mr. Crouch had complied with the rule about Muggle dressing so thoroughly that he could have passed for a bank manager
“But maybe he doesn’t care ... it’d probably just make him admire Crouch even more. Yeah, Percy loves rules. He’d just say Crouch was refusing to break them for his own son.”
“Percy would never throw any of his family to the dementors,” said Hermione severely.
“I don’t know,” said Ron. “If he thought we were standing in the way of his career ... Percy’s really ambitious, you know...”

Just a couple of examples grabbed from my digital copies. I just feel that this might be one editor's assessment of Percy's character and his intentions. I accept that you're trying to improve the project - but so am I, and I'm not convinced that all your edits are doing that. With a certain amount of irony - and humour - I dare suggest that Percy's characteristics might be applied here as well. Just chill a bit. Yes, everything needs a source if challenged, but that doesn't mean you have to challenge everything. Chaheel Riens (talk) 21:44, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if my comments came off as overbearing. That was not my intention. I believe 100% that you are trying, like me, to improve Wikipedia. If anything I said gave the impression that I doubted your good intentions, then I apologize for that also.

When you say I don't have to challenge everything, are you saying we shouldn't try to make pages fully sourced? I've always had the impression that sourcing all content on a page is a worthy goal. Wafflewombat (talk) 22:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm saying pick your battles. Some of the things that you're challenging are pretty low down in the contention stakes - such as Percy's personality, and the name of the Defence against the Dark Arts classes while under Voldemort's reign. Percy's personality can be easily ascertained from reading the books, and there's a risk of picking up on every little trait becoming a case of both WP:BLUESKY and such an overdose of sources that the truly interesting ones will get lost in a sea of links. We'll end up with nothing but a huge list of quotes from the books (such as above) that confirm his personality, but massively pad out the article and it becomes TLDR - the opposite of the project's intention. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:46, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I understand your perspective on this. Thanks for being willing to engage in dialogue. Wafflewombat (talk) 14:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]