Talk:Harry Potter (character)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
![]() |
Archive 1 |
Contents |
[edit] Detailed family relations of Harry is irrelevant
Paragraph 5 of the Background section is highly irrelevant. We should delete it and just provide a link to the main page Relatives of Harry Potter. If I do not hear any arguments against it, I will make the change in a week's time. Sushovande 12:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Picture should depict Harry, not Daniel
The picture on this page should be an artist's impression of Harry Potter, not a real person who plays the role! Sushovande 16:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
- You're right, we probably should. But Daniel as Harry has become an international icon. Anyone who has seen the movie will think thats what Harry looks like. And usually, people like seeing a real life person, rather than a drawing. And you have to admit, in most drawings of Harry, Daniel looks eerily like him. Disinclination 21:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
- The point of a picture is to identify the subject under discussion. No other picture would be universally recogniseable. It also immediately shows the interpretation of Harry made by warner bros, after consultation with Rowling. Sandpiper 01:03, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- No, keep Daniel as Harry, simply because he's himself Daniel Radcliffe in the role of Harry Potter. Other articles of Hermione and Ron also apply this kind of depiction. Thus I will recover the original version as synchronization.AbelinCAusesobad 13:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- The point of a picture is to identify the subject under discussion. No other picture would be universally recogniseable. It also immediately shows the interpretation of Harry made by warner bros, after consultation with Rowling. Sandpiper 01:03, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Original Harry Potter
Wouldn't this section be better off further down, rather than right near the start of the article? --Dave. 23:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- It shouldn't be in this article at all. If there's a reputable source commenting on any similarities between the two, Harry Potter would probably be the best place for it; if there isn't, it should stay in its own article. To put it here would be to suggest that there is a connection or basis between the two - and whilst we may or may not think that, without serious proof, it would be OR (and slanderous) to introduce it here. Michaelsanders 00:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] possessions
I have separated possessions by book. I intend to work them into the sections as soon as possible; if anyone can finish it up before I can, please try (I do think they are relevant).--Aaronhumes 21:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- I finished for you. Sargun 05:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- No, apparently 72.200.27.179 (talk • contribs • WHOIS) did. Maybe you forgot to log in. At any rate, whoever did this should use the preview function for future edits. John Reaves (talk) 05:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] DOB
The first book, where the character is supposedly 11, is written on 1997. Surely the, the character's DOB is in 1985, as opposed to 1980? Nowhere in the book does it claim this year of birth as far as i am aware. Could somebody with knowledge of this leave a message either here, or on my Talk Page? Jonomacdrones 20:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- It was implied in book 2, where the date was referenced as 500 years since 1492; Rowling then confirmed it on her Black Family Tree sketch, where Draco (Harry's contemporary) was shown as being born in 1980. Michaelsanders 21:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Lack of Education
Should it be discussed that he hasn't received any form of education in non-magical subjects since the age of 11 and what implications this leads to in terms of his status as a children's role model and perceived intelligence in the normal world? 65.213.142.2 13:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)