text:
Talk:Hogwarts houses

Hogwarts founders was merged and redirected to this article, this is the old version of that article's talk page.

We should separate the four houses onto their own pages.
 * Why create additional articles when there is so little information for each house? Seeing that the four houses form a very specific group, having them on a single page and redirecting queries for "Gryffindor", "Hufflepuff", "Ravenclaw" or "Slytherin" to this article does no harm. It even seems more efficient, as one can compare the houses instantly. Sinistro 21:09, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Ravenclaw Description
Currently, the description is, "Ravenclaw values intelligence, knowledge, wit, and beauty." The book has never mentioned that Ravenclaws valued beauty. Flitwick (when he was young), Cho Chang, and Rowena Ravenclaw herself were mentioned to be good looking, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the house values "beauty." Therefore, I'm going to replace it with the word "wisdom" as the sorting hat described the Ravenclaw house as "wise."

Airox 02:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Suggested Merge
I disagree with the merge as both articles are of a good size. What does everybody else think? --bjwebb 19:11, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I also disagree. I think this article is quite capable of standing on its own, and we also don't want to make the Hogwarts article so massive that nobody would want to read it.--Zequist 19:21, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. The Hogwarts article is long enough! --Urbane legend 15:23, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * There's quite a buttlo lot of Harry Potter subtopics already, and this would seem to be the most effective execution. --Kizor 18:21, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't think the two articles should be merged. This article is of a good size and will require substantial haemorrhaging of worthy material in order to fit it in without making Hogwarts too big. --Sanguinus 17:45, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

I've removed the merge request for the above reasons. --Kizor 13:53, 26 July 2005 (UTC) --Side note-- I could be wrong but i thought Hagrid was in Hufflepuff not Grifindor.

Note to anyone intending on splitting off a section
This page has been processed by N-Bot, which, for browsing convenience, changes links to redirects to lists to links to the relevant list sections: e.g. Hufflepuff is changed to Hufflepuff.

As a result, anyone who intends to split a section out of this page should be aware that, as of 3 September 2005, the following sections were linked to from the following pages:

 * Slytherin: Severus Snape, Draco Malfoy, Lord Voldemort, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, Mary Sue fanfiction, Cedric Diggory, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Remus Lupin, Narcissa Malfoy, Bellatrix Lestrange, Lucius Malfoy, Vincent Crabbe, Regulus Black, Gregory Goyle, Tom Riddle, Bletchley, Blaise Zabini, List of wizarding terms in translations of Harry Potter, Andromeda Tonks, Phineas Nigellus, List of characters in the Harry Potter books, Pansy Parkinson, Magical objects in Harry Potter, Will Theakston, Witherwings, Minor Slytherins, Derrick (disambiguation), Broomsticks in Harry Potter, Hogwarts ghosts, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (video game), Minor Dark wizards in Harry Potter, Minor characters associated with Quidditch, Harry Potter: Quidditch World Cup, Weasley family, Horace Slughorn, Eileen Prince, Sorting Hat songs, The Hogwarts Founders
 * Gryffindor: Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger, Lord Voldemort, Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, Cedric Diggory, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Molly Weasley, Ginny Weasley, Percy Weasley, Bill Weasley, Charlie Weasley, Arthur Weasley, Remus Lupin, Neville Longbottom, Minerva McGonagall, Sirius Black, Fred and George Weasley, Peter Pettigrew, Dobby, Fawkes, Regulus Black, List of wizarding terms in translations of Harry Potter, Tom Riddle's diary, Aberforth Dumbledore, Colin and Dennis Creevey, List of characters in the Harry Potter books, Harry Potter (character), Portraits in Hogwarts, Canonical spells in the world of Harry Potter, Magical objects in Harry Potter, Minor Ravenclaws, Minor Slytherins, Gryffindors in Harry Potter's year, Broomsticks in Harry Potter, Hogwarts ghosts, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (video game), Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (video game), Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (video game), Minor members of the Order of the Phoenix, Minor characters associated with Quidditch, Harry Potter: Quidditch World Cup, James and Lily Potter, Weasley family, Mimbulus mimbletonia, Cormac McLaggen, Harry Potter parodies, Romilda Vane, Sorting Hat songs, The Hogwarts Founders
 * Hufflepuff: Lord Voldemort, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, Cedric Diggory, List of wizarding terms in translations of Harry Potter, List of characters in the Harry Potter books, Pomona Sprout, Magical objects in Harry Potter, Minor Hufflepuffs, Hogwarts ghosts, Minor Ministry officials in the Harry Potter books, Harry Potter: Quidditch World Cup, Sorting Hat songs, The Hogwarts Founders, Hepzibah Smith
 * Ravenclaw: Lord Voldemort, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Percy Weasley, Cho Chang, Luna Lovegood, Marietta Edgecombe, List of wizarding terms in translations of Harry Potter, Filius Flitwick, Andromeda Tonks, The Grey Lady, List of characters in the Harry Potter books, Magical objects in Harry Potter, Minor Hufflepuffs, Minor Ravenclaws, Gryffindors in Harry Potter's year, Hogwarts ghosts, Minor characters associated with Quidditch, Harry Potter: Quidditch World Cup, Sorting Hat songs, The Hogwarts Founders, Minor Slug Club members

N-Bot (t/c) 20:20, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

The Sorting Hat's preferences if any
I would disagree that the sorting hat has a preference with regard to which house Harry Potter should have been sorted into. The hat declares Harry difficult to sort, and it is influenced by Harry's not wanting to be sorted into Slytherin. Is there text from any of the six books that show that the sorting hat itself wanted Harry to be sorted into Slytherin? The first book merely indicated that the hat reasoned with Harry about the advantages of Slytherin. It does so because Harry has strongly thought against Slytherin in particular. My read on this is that the sorting hat did not prefer Harry to be sorted into Slytherin: it sorts on the basis of an impartial evaluation of the qualities of each first year student. I would like to hear arguments pro and con on this. If I am ignoring documented proof, I would like to be enlightened.

The factors that would lean toward sorting Harry into Slytherin would be 1) his link with Voldemort through his being spared death at the latter's hands, and 2) his ability to speak "parcel tongue," the sibilant, serpent language, so apropos to the heraldic symbol of the snake. I would welcome discussion on this matter. drboisclair 20:42, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I havn't checked this myself, but an item i was reading suggested that in most cases the hat sems to go along with the students, when they already have a firm idea of where they want to go. It seems to argue to make sure they know what they want. But it only has to make a choice when the student is unsure. Sandpiper 22:39, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that you have the correct idea. I failed to mention the interchange Harry had with the sorting hat in Chamber of Secrets: There it is brought out that the sorting hat would have put Harry into Slytherin if he had not had the strong desire against it. drboisclair 21:16, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * In the seventh book, Dumbledore states to Snape that a part of Voldemort's soul latched itself onto Harry the day the day the former tried to kill the latter. Therefore, Harry was the seventh Horcrux. The part of Voldemort's soul inside Harry would, of course, have had an influence on the Sorting Hat. Chakrachakra 18:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that the Sorting Hat recognized that the boy(Harry)had qualities for both houses, and if not one, then the other would prevail!--Chili14 16:53, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Gryffindor Loyalty
It is common fanon that loyalty is a Gryffindor trait. However, this is true in neither theory nor practice. None of the sorting songs associate Gryffindor with loyalty. In practice, we have such examples as Peter Pettigrew, Percy Weasley, the regular fights between Ron and Harry, etc. One might consider Gryffindors to be loyal to their own ideals and heart, but that isn't the common meaning of 'loyalty'.

For these reasons I have removed 'loyalty' from the list of Gryffindor traits. If you wish to add it, please be sure you can justify its presence on that list. --Obsidian-fox 23:49, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed, while individual Gryffindors have been called "loyal", the only house referred to as "loyal" as a rule has been Hufflepuff. -- 22:52, 7 May 2006 (EST)

Hufflepuff

 * "Perhaps as a consequence of the broad principles of acceptance upon which it is founded, Hufflepuff has been stereotyped as the house of the unexceptional (or, more unkindly, as "a lot o' duffers"). That means, Hufflepuff applies all IQ levelled wizards."

I don't remember any of this being mentioned or implied in the books. The tone seems to suggest that Hufflepuff is somehow inferior to the other Houses - a dumping ground as it were for misfits or something. Can someone please come up with some exact quotes on which to base this thinking - with "chapter, page, and verse" - from the books? Otherwise I believe this is rather inappropriate POV commentary which should be (and has previously been) deleted. T-dot 12:47, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

 * (Draco speaking) "I'll be in Slytherin, all our family have been -- imagine being in Hufflepuff, I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?"
 * (SS 5, pg77 hard back)

 * (Hagrid speaking) "School houses. There's four. Everyone says Hufflepuff are a lot o' duffers, but --"
 * "I bet I'm in Hufflepuff" said Harry gloomily.
 * "Better Hufflepuff than Slytherin," said Hagrid darkly.
 * (SS 5, pg 80, hard back)

 * These two quotes indicate that most of the wizarding world, be they Slytherins or Gryffindors, thinks of Hufflepuff in the manner you describe - a dumping ground for those who don't belong to one of the more prestigious houses. This is sufficient evidence that a stereotype clearly exists.  --Obsidian-fox 10:28, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Said Slytherin, "We'll teach just those whose ancestry's purest."
 * Said Ravenclaw, "We'll teach those whose intelligence is surest"
 * Said Gryffindor, "We'll teach all those with brave deeds to their name."
 * Said Hufflepuff, "I'll teach the lot and treat them just the same."
 * [...]
 * For instance, Slytherin took only pure-blood wizards of great cunning just like him.
 * And only those of sharpest mind were taught by Ravenclaw
 * While the bravest and the boldest went to daring Gryffindor.
 * Good Hufflepuff, she took the rest and taught them all she knew,
 * (OotP, sorting song)

 * This quote indicates that Hufflepuff is, indeed, something of a landing spot for all students that don't fit into the other three houses; it isn't stereotyped without cause.

 * I hope that satisfies. --Obsidian-fox 10:28, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

 * OK thank you – that is very good, and exactly the sort of "documentation" I was looking for. However some comments and observations:

 * We all know Draco's views on "mudbloods" and virtually anyone or anything different from himself (Hagrid, Buckbeak, Dumbledore, the Weasleys) – so I hardly think his rather "racist" opinion about Hufflepuff is particularly valid and certainly not encyclopedic.

 * Hagrid's "Everyone says…" comment is clearly followed by a very clear "but --", which is a huge red flag a-waving – he clearly does not believe it himself. Harry's subsequent developing viewpoint is based on what "Everyone says" rather than the truth of the matter.  --T-dot 12:12, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Well... I wouldn't assert that the 'but' means that Hagrid doesn't believe it. His comments are just as easily interpreted as "Slytherins are even worse than Hufflepuffs."  --Obsidian-fox 18:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Hufflepuff's "sorting song" segments speak of openness and inclusiveness – very reminiscent in fact of the Statue of Liberty proclamation: "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door.". With a respectful nod to our European cousins – I hardly think this makes the United States of America "a lot o' duffers" with a low IQ, although we are aware that some may think so.  Therefore I do not think that similar sentiments in the sorting hat songs makes Hufflepuff in some way inferior to the others.

 * Not to mention: we certainly see that Hogwarts' "legitimate" Triwizard Champion, Hufflepuff's Cedric Diggory is (was) in no way, shape, or form, a slouch himself.

 * On the basis of this, my view is all we can say about Hufflepuff is that it is open and inclusive of all wizarding students of all backgrounds, and not exclusive and restrictive (or even snobby) like the other houses seem to be in many regards; and "IQ" is certainly not a factor (do they even do IQ anymore? - I thought they pretty much abandoned that), as the original post claimed.

 * Well not exactly "satisfied" - but hearty thanks Obsidian-fox for your thoughts and quotes! My main concern is that we remain analytic and encyclopedic about the context and meanings, and not get overly interpretive of off-the-cuff remarks and commentary by avowed "racists and bigots". T-dot 12:12, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't really see the comment on low IQ above ("all IQ?" I don't know what the author meant, but it seems to me that it means something other than "low IQ.").  Anyhow,the main point of the comment was not to say that Hufflepuffs are, indeed, a lot o' duffer's, or that they deserve that label.  It was merely to point out that the stereotype exists, and it gave one of the reasons why (the 'open nature' of Hufflepuff).  I agree that Hufflepuff's views hardly lead to a set of somehow inferior people; Hufflepuffs are just people, like anyone else.  However, the very idea that Hufflepuff is something of a 'dumping ground' is not a stereotype that exists without cause.  Consider, if some magical hat came along and every year selected as new Americans the "tired, poor, wretched refuse of your teeming shore" while other houses got their pick of the rest (including the smart, the brave, and the cunning), then I'm sure America would suffer some related stereotypes.

 * Anyhow, pointing out that racism and bigotry exists is clearly NPOV, so long as we carefully word the comments to ensure that we are not inflicting that racism or bigotry upon the readers. I do prefer the version currently in the article to the one you quoted above.  --Obsidian-fox 18:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi. I was the one who introduced these 2 sentences into the Hufflepuff section (in June 2005):
 * Hufflepuff is the most inclusive among the four houses, valuing hard work and patience, loyalty and friendship, and justice and fair play rather than a particular aptitude in its members.
 * Perhaps as a consequence of the broad principles of acceptance upon which it is founded, Hufflepuff has been stereotyped as the house of the unexceptional (or, more unkindly, as "a lot o' duffers").
 * (The sentence about IQ was recently appended by an anonymous editor; if I'd seen it first, I would've removed it at once.)

 * I arrived belatedly to personally defend my choice of words, but I'm glad Obsidian-fox here sees things as I do and has responded as I would have. (Thanks, Obsidian-fox!)  As a stickler for canon and the verifiable in general, and as an HP reader who sees himself as one who understands and appreciates Hufflepuff in particular, I wanted to describe Hufflepuff fairly as well as positively.  By acknowledging its underdog reputation -- but never judging it as inferior -- I hope my phrasing has done justice to this quarter of Rowling's microcosm.  (Hurrah for the under-badger, Hufflepuff House!)  Mercury McKinnon 12:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Padma
The Ravenclaw section states that "In the movie Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Padma was in Gryffindor". I'm not too sure about this, it's noted on some fan forums that some houses are mixed in many classes (which is why Draco and Harry both attend the Care of Magical Creatures class in Prisoner of Azkaban). Is there anything specific that points to Padma's house in the movie, aside from being in a class with Gryffindors? - UglinessMan 08:36, 10 February 2006

 * This is because in the books Padma Patil is in Ravenclaw house and her identicle twin sister Parvati Patil is in Gryffindor house, however in the film of GoF the two appear in a scene together in the Gryffindor common room when Harry ask's them both to attend the Yule Ball with Ron and himself. Seeing as the only people allowed in the House Common rooms are members of that house, this would suggest that either this particular rule has been conveniently overlooked or for the purposes of the films she is now going to be incorrectly shown as a gryffindor.  Death Eater Dan    [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px|  ]] 16:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't believe that's sufficient evidence. Any person in a house could easily allow other people into the commons.  Considering this is immediately prior to the Yule Ball, it is entirely plausible that Padma Patil was simply with her sister while getting dressed up... or looking for a date.  (What's implausible is that they didn't have dates already...).  Anyhow, considering the evidence is insufficient for the conclusion, I'm going to remove the comment. --Obsidian-fox 07:52, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I could be wrong, but when Ron was dating Lavender Brown (a Ravenclaw) in HBP, wasn't she in the common room at one point or another? Emily 23:32, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

 * ??? Lavender is definitely a Gryffindor. --Obsidian-fox 23:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry! I don't know what I was thinking... she is a Gryffindor... I actually do know what I'm talking about when it comes to Harry Potter, honestly... Emily 20:33, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The HP Lexicon states that Padma was a Gryffindor in the movies. I believe this is evidence enough to include it here, but will leave the editing to someone else, in case the rest of you disagree with me. Faithlessthewonderboy 06:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Slytherin
Should Phineas Nigellus's quote from OoTP (which I'll post in a moment), or the information it contains about Slytherins, be added? Or do you find it unneccessary? "We Slytherins are brave, yes, but not stupid. For instance, when given the choice, we will always choose to save our own necks." (This possible trait of Slytherins could also apply to Snape at the end of HBP...)

Please respond! Emily 23:47, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

 * It sounds like a fine quote to me. However, more of the context should also be applied.  Can you give page and chapter numbers?  --Obsidian-fox 00:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes. On page 495 of my U.S. version of the book, Phineas says this. The entire scene with Harry and Phineas's chat starts on 494 and ends on 496. Harry has just found out that he's being possessed by Voldemort- or at least he thinks he is. He decides that, in order to protect his friends, he'd have to return to the Dursleys. Harry "strode over to his trunk, slammed the lid shut and locked it, then glanced around for Hedwig before remembering that she was still at Hogwarts - well, her cage would be one less thing to carry - he seized one end of his trunk and had dragged it halfway toward the door when a sneaky voice said, 'Running away, are we?'".

Phineas then makes his comment about how he thought "that to belong in Gryffindor, you were supposed to be brave". Phineas says it looks like Harry would have been better off in his own house, Slytherin, then says the quote I posted above. Harry then tells Phineas that it's not his own neck he's saving, and then Phineas says a line I really enjoy- it makes me smile every time I read it. "Oh I see," said Phineas Nigellus, still stroking his beard. "This is no cowardly flight - you are being noble."

Well, I will include Phineas's quote, with a brief summary of its context in the article. You can tell me if it needs to be fixed (or fix it yourself, of course). Emily 20:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Is this line correct? There are definite examples of half-bloods in the house (Snape, Voldemort), and one notable example of a half-blood who was nearly sorted into the house (Harry Potter).

Both Harry's parents are Wizards - I am not sure this statement rings true.

 * Harry's mother was a muggle-born. As has repeatedly been stated, 'half-blood' means the child of a muggleborn and another wizard/witch, as well as a child of a muggle and a witch/wizard. Michaelsanders 17:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

It says it's "statistically unlikely" that every bad withch or wizard was in Slytherin, but is it really any more statistically unlikely than any of the other possibilites (none of the evil witches and wizards being Slytherins, half of them, 23% of them, etc.)? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Evil Slytherin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.1.212.4 (talk) 20:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Question: Does Hagrid really say, in any of the books, that "every wizard that's ever gone bad was in Slytherin"? I remember it being in movie 1, but I also recall looking for it as I read through the books, and I did not find it. If I am right, then this article could be cleaned up significantly by replacing this quote with a related one in the books (ex: Slytherin has turned out more dark wizards than any other house), and removing all comments related to the continuity issue this quote creates regarding the belief that Sirius Black was a dark wizard. I think the speculation in these comments are unhelpful and confusing when talking about the Slytherin house, especially if the quote they are based on is not in the books.--Larikofgal 04:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

 * He says, on page 80 of my version (in the chapter Diagon Alley), "There's not a single witch or wizard went bad who wasn't in Slytherin."

Along the same vein, I think this article is too apologetic about Slytherin. It says that Harry describes most Slytherins as bullying, haughty, or evil, but it's not Harry doing the describing, it's Rowling! It's hardly speculation that Slytherin is, generally speaking, the "bad" house. As far as the books tell us, every single one of Voldemort's supporters, except Peter Pettigrew, were in Slytherin. Almost every Slytherin character is portrayed negatively (again, not by Harry, but by Rowling). Obviously there are exceptions, but even the supposedly good Slytherins aren't entirely likeable. Snape, for example, despite his redeeming qualities, is pretty brutal towards students he doesn't like, and Slughorn is pretty much a straight-up coward. It's also worth noting that Dumbledore implies, after the adult Snape shows his good qualities, might have belonged better in Gryffindor; this shows that, at least according to Dumbledore, cowardice is a Slytherin trait. Of course every house has good and bad qualities—Gryffindors are brave but sometimes arrogant; Hufflepuffs are loyal and hard-working but sometimes dim-witted; Ravenclaws are smart but sometimes aloof. In the case of Slytherin, however, the bad qualities are so bad that they really outweigh the ones that could be construed as good. Slytherins are ambitious but sometimes evil. They're not being unfairly stereotyped as the article claims. Rowling herself describes them that way. Ebolamunkee (talk) 05:58, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Hepzibah Smith
She is a very minor character, sure, and that seems to be the reason that she keeps being deleted from the Hufflepuff list- but still, she is "notable"... She is memorable, unusual, may have a part in book 7... Why continue to delete people's edits that add her to the list? Do you really think she's too minor to be worth mentioning? Emily 19:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Hello. Yes, I really believe Hepzibah Smith does not deserve to be listed as a "notable Hufflepuff" for 2 reasons:
 * I don't find her notable enough. I believe one has to set objective qualifications, to set pegs for what counts as "notable"; otherwise the question becomes too subjective, and an argument can be put for most any character's notability. The most obvious such peg is significance, importance. Memorable, unusual?  I think these criteria are too personal/subjective; they would greatly vary from person to person.  (Myself, I honestly don't find Hepzibah to be either particularly memorable or unusual.)
 * My understanding of the purpose of the "list of notable Hufflepuffs", is it is meant to be a "short list" -- that is, it is not a complete list of Hufflepuffs, but only the top-tier names (again, "top-tier" depends on where you draw the line). I think most people would agree that Hepzibah Smith can be left off of a short list based on significance.  Of course, significance itself is not abolute, it must be validated by consensus. (I'd consider Hepzibah to be a third-string character at best.)
 * It is not even fairly certain that she is a Hufflepuff. Nowhere is it stated or implied that Hepzibah was Sorted into Hufflepuff.  Her claimed descent from Helga Hufflepuff does not equate to her being a member of Hufflepuff House; to assume that Hepzibah is a Hufflepuff just because of her lineage (rather than her own personality) is to make the jump that birth and blood define these characters -- something belied by much of the work.
 * The easy solution I'm proposing is to include Hepzibah Smith in the Minor Hufflepuffs article, which is linked to from the Hufflepuff section of the Hogwarts Houses article. This still puts her one click away, without listing her as "notable". --Mercurio 02:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

OK. It is true that she might not be a Hufflepuff... just as Slytherin's heir was half-blood, etc. We can keep her out, I was just noticing the "back-and-forth" putting her in and taking her out thing... she isn't really all that significant of a character if you think about it, as the thing that is important is what happens with her and because of her- but not her herself. If that made any sense. I was just rambling, I guess... Emily 00:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * People have been going back and forth adding and removing characters from the "notable member" lists ever since that section was added to the article. One person adds a character because they think he/she is notable or (more often) is their favorite character, then the next person comes along and says "why is this nobody on the list?" and takes them out again. The only way to stop that merry-go-round would be to remove the "notable member" lists from the article entirely and just say "see the 'character list' article for characters from this house" instead. Which is why I added those "for a complete list, see..." links several months back; at that time the lists of "house characters" were so long that we were practically duplicating the 'character list' article all over again in this article. I've always thought this article should ideally list a maximum of 3-5 characters per house, but that would be almost impossible to enforce because of that same problem of people coming along and adding their favorite character back in again.--Zequist 02:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Houses of heads
In her website FAQ, Rowling stated that the head of a house (as well was the house ghost) is a former student that was Sorted into that house. Hence, the known heads of houses -- Flitwick, Sprout, McGonagall, Snape, Slughorn -- were each a student within the house he/she has led.

That Dumbledore was a former head of house (prior to becoming Headmaster) is unconfirmed at this point. Hence, his house is less certain. The assumption that Dumbledore was a Gryffindor is primarily based on Hermione's comment in Book 1 Chapter 6 that she had heard/learned that Dumbledore was in this house (and that this contributed to her own favoring of Gryffindor as "by far the best" house to be Sorted into). There are other arguments offered for the contention that Dumbledore was in Gryffindor. This includes a scene in the Goblet of Fire film where the headmaster is in Harry's dormitory in Gryffindor Tower, and he tells Harry: "I never liked these curtains. I set them on fire in my fourth year. Accidentally, of course." Quote on IMDb --Mercurio 00:38, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

What happens if the school doesn't happen to have a representative of a particular House on its staff? Do the school hiring policies discriminate to ensure that it will always have at least one staff member from a particular House? If McGonagall is the only Gryffindor currently in the school at the end of HBP, will her replacement have to be a Gryffindor? Or - just a thought - is this one of those ill-thought out statements Rowling throws out without considering the consequences (does anyone remember the Weasley Ages debacle)?Michaelsanders 23:57, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

 * There are only four houses, and many students. Each year, the students appear to be distributed among the houses approximately evenly.  I admit there's no hard evidence to support this, but it's at the very least a reasonable theory, considering the house towers are likely of equal size, the tables in the Great Hall definitely are of equal size (and have appeared to be equally occupied in the movies), and if any particular house had significantly more or less members than the others, it's logical that such an imbalance would be mentioned, perhaps as a plot point.  Again, these points are conjecture, but logical assumptions.  My point is that with so many people distributed among only four houses, the odds of not having a former member of any given house available at any point in time would have to be extremely low.  As we have seen, Dumbledore has a history of hunting down friends and former students to fill gaps in the staff, so if there is no Gryffindor currently on staff available to head a house (we don't know the houses of every teacher anyway), McGonagall would still have the entire summer to track down someone who might agree to join the staff, like Dumbledor would have.
 * In the end, it's nothing but guess work on both sides of the coin. We could probably come up with dozens of "what if" situations, and then develop theories as to how these situations would likely be handled.  The underlying point is that Hogwart's is a well-run institute, and the Ministry of Magic has loads of provisions and guidelines that exist but haven't come up in the books yet, for no other reason than there's been no need for them to come up.  So, it's safe to assume that each of these "what if" situations does indeed have some solution, but us book-loving Muggles won't know what these solutions are unless such a situation arises and Rowling is presented with the need to invent the solution, then present it to us. - Ugliness Man 10:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Ravenclaw.
I think that some people doesn't know exact about the animal of Ravenclaw. I personally think that Eagle or Raven both of them are the animal that represents the Ravenclaw. So, Which of Animal (Raven,Eagle) is right for Animal of Ravenclaw. Ahh, Are there any other person who was descendent of Rowena Ravenclaw? Like Hepzibah Smith is descendent of Helga Hufflepuff, and Tom Riddle is descendent of Salazar Slytherin. I personally think that Luna Lovegood(Ginny's friend in Ravenclaw)might be the descendent of Ravenclaw. There are not so many characters are from Ravenclaw in Harry Potter Series. Ravenclaw's popular character is Luna Lovegood.......May be We will know more about Ravenclaw in Book Seven as We know about Hufflepuff in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, and also about Ravenclaw Horcux. Daniel5127, 02:39, 29 April 2006(UTC)

I agree that this going back and forth eagle -> raven -> eagle -> raven must stop. Should we put some indication in the text (e.g. an exact citation from JKR) so that people stop changing it? Lag 10:02, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Harry picked it up and stared at it, his heart twanging like a giant elastic band. No one, ever, in his whole life, had written to him. Who would? He had no friends, no other relatives -- he didn't belong to the library, so he'd never even got rude notes asking for books back. Yet here it was, a letter, addressed so plainly there could be no mistake: Mr. H. Potter The Cupboard under the Stairs 4 Privet Drive Little Whinging Surrey The envelope was thick and heavy, made of yellowish parchment, and the address was written in emerald-green ink. There was no stamp. Turning the envelope over, his hand trembling, Harry saw a purple wax seal bearing a coat of arms; a lion, an eagle, a badger, and a snake surrounding a large letter H.

 * That's from Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
 * - Ugliness Man 14:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks Uglinessman!! Lag 19:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe Harry just *thought* it was an eagle, and it was actually a raven. There's a bunch of places in GOF where the book says "Moody did whatever", but we know that it was actually Crouch Jr.  I'm not saying that's the case here, just that we can't be sure.  32.97.110.142 20:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Nope, I was wrong. In Goblet of Fire, we have:
 * "When they went down to breakfast on the morning of the thirtieth of October, they found that the Great Hall had been decorated overnight. Enormous silk banners hung from the walls, each of them representing a Hogwarts House:  red with a gold lion for Gryffindor, blue with a bronze eagle for Ravenclaw, yellow with a black badger for Hufflepuff, and green with a silver serpent for Slytherin.  Behind the teachers' table, the largest banner of all bore the Hogwarts coat of arms: lion, eagle, badger, and snake united around a large letter H."
 * In book 5, Luna wore an eagle hat to support Ravenclaw's quidditch team (similar to the lion hat she wore to support Gryffindor). 32.97.110.142 19:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Point of interest: apparently in the middle ages and renaissance, artists didn't have access to eagles, or much knowledge of what they looked like; and therefore, depictions of eagles often looked more like crows or ravens. Does that have any relevance to this debate (e.g. if it is depicted in the films as a raven, could there be any connection to this)?Michaelsanders 15:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Hagrid's House
Hagrid has been removed from the Gryffindor list and returned shortly after. I think there are two main reasons for this. First of all, as far as I can tell there's no concrete evidence in any of the books so far that "proves" which house he was in. Secondly, I've spoken with many people who had a slightly muddled recollection of a conversation between him and Harry in the first book, in which he explains the four houses, and these people seem to think it was suggested that Hagrid was in Hufflepuff. Anyway, whatever the reasons, these people didn't bother to check Hagrid's actual page, because if they had, they'd see the citation that shows that JK Rowling has stated, without any ambguity, that he is indeed in Gryffindor. If this "correction" happens again, it might be a good idea to put some sort of "see talk page" note in the revert comment. - Ugliness Man 13:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

 * As predicted, it's happened again! I put the note in the edit summary, and would care to share my opinion on the Hagrid's house debate. Not that there's much of one. Ahem.
 * Hagrid is a Gryffindor, tried and true. McGonagall selects him to go to Dumbledore's office at the end of HBP because he not only was trusted by Dumbledore, but was a Gryffindor, thus maintaining one teacher from each house, and a neutral Headmistress. Also, to counter the Hufflepuff argument, the reason Hagrid mentioned "Hufflepuffs... load of duffers" was because he was (a) a student who had seen the predjudices and (b) a member of staff, again seeing the prejudices. This does not imply that he is a member of Hufflepuff. I think that's all, but if I remember any other points I'll be sure to list them.  THE  DARK LORD TROMBONATOR  ( ( (¶) ) )  08:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Siriusly?
I'm just wondering why Sirius Black was removed from the Gryffindor list. If it has to do with how noteworthy his character is, that's ridiculous. The third story focused on him, and he was one of the most important characters in the fifth. If it was because of a lack of evidence that he was actually in that house, here's an excerpt from an online chat in which JK Rowling confirmed Black's house:

 * What houses were Sirius Black, Remus Lupin, James Potter and Remus Lupin[sic] in? Everyone tells me they were all Gryffindor, but I won't believe it unless I hear it from Ms. Rowling herself!
 * JK Rowling says: This is JK herself saying that they were indeed in Gryffindor!

Anyway, I'm restoring his name to the list, if anyone has a more concrete reason to remove him again, please says so here. - Ugliness Man 08:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

 * This is "Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anyone can edit" and they do! Uninformed people come along all the time and change the facts in the articles into fantasy. If you're certain of your facts and have the references to back it up (and it sounds like you do!), put the fact back. And add the article to your watchlist because, as surely as the sun rises, someone will come along and crap it up again. Because... (everybody say it together this time) this is "Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anyone can edit".

 * Atlant 10:58, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

McGonagall's wrath
It appears we have another case of Wikipedians playing edit ping-pong, so once again allow me to step in and attempt to clarify. The Harry Potter movies all have plot points that are different from the books. In the first book, Neville was with Harry and Hermione when they got caught out of bed after hours... in this case, Harry and Hermione were helping Norbert the dragon get sent to Romania covertly, several nights after Hagrid told them about the dragon (Hagrid never got in trouble for having the dragon because Malfoy didn't get the chance to snitch). In the movie, the core trio got in trouble for being out of bed after hours on the same night that Hagrid told them about the dragon. The point is, whenever the book and the movie differentiate, the book always takes precident as true canon, and this incident in the article is using the book as a source. However, because about a zillion people who saw the movie never even glanced at the book, they think that they're making a "correction" by changing Neville to Ron in the article. It's not a correction, it's a misunderstanding. Please stop changing it. Also, there's no specific need to use the American title of the book and then put the original title in parentheses as if it was a minor piece of trivia. The Philosopher's Stone is the original source text. - Ugliness Man 11:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with fantasy if the article is about fantasy.LOL Supernerd 10 20:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Article title
This article was moved back on 26 July from Hogwarts Houses to Hogwarts houses. I believe the word 'House' is capitalized in the books. Just want to get a little consensus before I move it back. --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 19:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Don't move. While specific house's name might be, for example, Gryffindor House, "house" in the titke here is being used generically and belongs in lower case. Atlant 22:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Slytherin bias
Why is the slytherin section of the artical written so biasedly?Harry has an "evil slytherin" point of view because he is in their rival house.The article should acknowledge that the reason slytherin has their evil image is because the book's main character despises them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.245.15.50 (talk) 01:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

 * It's more than the main character with a bias. Pretty much everyone hates the Slytherins, and are supposed to. Jstohler (talk) 19:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

 * I disagree; I think the article is too apologetic about Slytherin. It says that Harry describes most Slytherins as bullying, haughty, or evil, but it's not Harry doing the describing, it's Rowling! It's hardly speculation that Slytherin is, generally speaking, the "bad" house. As far as the books tell us, every single one of Voldemort's supporters, except Peter Pettigrew, were in Slytherin. Almost every Slytherin character is portrayed negatively (again, not by Harry, but by Rowling). Obviously there are exceptions, but even the supposedly good Slytherins aren't entirely likeable. Snape, for example, despite his redeeming qualities, is pretty brutal towards students he doesn't like, and Slughorn is pretty much a straight-up coward. It's also worth noting that Dumbledore implies, after the adult Snape shows his good qualities, might have belonged better in Gryffindor; this shows that, at least according to Dumbledore, cowardice is a Slytherin trait. Of course every house has good and bad qualities—Gryffindors are brave but sometimes arrogant; Hufflepuffs are loyal and hard-working but sometimes dim-witted; Ravenclaws are smart but sometimes aloof. In the case of Slytherin, however, the bad qualities are so bad that they really outweigh the ones that could be construed as good. Slytherins are ambitious but sometimes evil. They're not being unfairly stereotyped as the article claims. Rowling herself describes them that way.71.193.240.102 (talk) 04:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Dumbledore's house
Can anyone confirm that Dumbledore was (in fact) from Griffindor? If not then he should not be mentioned under notable Griffindors. Zain Ebrahim 10:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Dumbledore mentions to Harry that he set the curtains of his bed on fire during his fourth year, in the same dormitory that Harry sleeps in. Mrs Thompson 12:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)Alicia Thompson 10:28, 14th June 2007.

That was in the movie not the book.

split
i think we should split Cory Donald (wizard) 09:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

 * But why? The length of this article is perfectly fine per WP:LENGTH, and there's not much material we might add to each house. We'd better keep the information clear and concise as it currently is. PeaceNT 15:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Slytherin=water
The assertion that Rowling has said Slytherin House corresponds to the water element was marked citation needed, but that is the reason, as far as I can tell, that the interview link at the bottom is to page 3 of the 3-page interview: the house/element correspondences are on that page. I would put the cite in the paragraph in question but all four house sections have similar element correspondences noted, and I don't think it makes sense to add the cite four times. I welcome any guidance on the style question of how and where to cite this.140.247.37.169 18:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, forgot to log in, that's me above. Claudia 18:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of which, I saw this in the article, and had to wonder:
 * The Slytherin common room is a long, low underground room (probably under the Hogwarts lake, corresponding with Slytherin house's affiliation with water)

(bolding mine for emphasis). Is there any reason for this speculation? Any possible canon source? I'm gonna put an in-cite for this, unless somebody's got some more info... --Umrguy42 19:00, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Doesn't Harry say in DH that the commonroom is under the lake (to the Snatchers)? THE  DARK LORD  TROMBONATOR 22:31, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Yes, he does say that, to the Snatchers. - Redmess (talk) 20:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

 * I know it's said to the Snatchers in DH, it is probably also mentioned in CoS when H and R are in the Slytherin common room. If you give me 1 minutes ill find the exact line if its needed сʜʌɴɒʟєʀ ♠ тʌʟκ 20:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * DH, ch 23 (Malfoy Manor) page 365: ‘it's in the dungeons,’ said Harry clearly. ‘You enter through the wall. It's full of skulls and stuff and it's under the lake, so the light's all green.’ сʜʌɴɒʟєʀ ♠ тʌʟκ 21:02, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism in Hogwarts Houses page
Harry Potter-related pages should be locked from editing by non-users until after the book is released, at the risk of spoilers being posted. Beemer69 03:05, July 19, 2007 (UTC)

Slytherin's Battle of Hogwarts Contribution
This section seems to be based upon a fundamental misreading of the text. As Harry plays dead and Neville is preparing to kill Nagini, many students suddenly begin attacking the Death Eaters again after Voldemort had thought he'd won the battle. This was because the Slytherin students -- who had faked defecting to Voldemort's side -- betrayed the Death Eaters and joined the other houses in combat. Slytherin did not not join in the battle. -- Anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.123.57.26 (talk) 10:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RowenaRavenclaw.JPG
Image:RowenaRavenclaw.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 16:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:GryffindorGodric.jpg
Image:GryffindorGodric.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:HelgaHufflepuff.jpg
Image:HelgaHufflepuff.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Magically Created Basilisk?
In the Salazar Slytherin Article it say's that the Basilisk which resides in the chamber of secrets was magically created. What is the basis for this statement? --Gotskills22 (talk) 06:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hhufflepuffcard.gif
Image:Hhufflepuffcard.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SalazarSlytherincard.gif
Image:SalazarSlytherincard.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ravenclaw.gif
Image:Ravenclaw.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Hufflepuff/Ravenclaw feud?
"Rowena Ravenclaw and Helga Hufflepuff, however, once great friends, are documented as having had a severe falling out at some point by the Sorting Hat's song in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix".

Is this confirmed in the actual book?

"But then discord crept among us Feeding on all our faults and fears. The Houses that, like pillars four Had once held up our school Now turned upon eachother and Divided, sought to rule. And for a while it seemed the school Must meet an early end. What with dueling and with fighting And the clash of friend on friend. And at last there came a morning When old Slytherin departed And though the fighting then died out, He left us quite down-hearted."

It is not mentioned in this section (the Sorting Hat's song in OotP) what the source of discord was. It could have been just Slytherin against the other three, it could have been all four of them against each other... I think the above statement is not valid. Kumorifox (talk) 20:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

All four of them fell out with each other, each of them wanting to choose who went into their houses. Eventually three of them (not Slytherin) became friends again, and they solved the problem by creating the Sorting Hat. Jammy (talk) 20:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

That makes sense, thanks. Should that be mentioned on the page as well? Kumorifox (talk) 14:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

 * It is already isn't it? Jammy (talk) 16:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal
According to the Notability discussion in the WikiProject HP, the Hogwarts houses article has not meet outside notability. The proposal then is to merge a trimmed version of this article into the main Hogwarts article. I was particularily think in moving only the four houses themselves. The founders and the ghosts can be moved to the Hogwarts staff article. To avoid the Staff article getting too large, we can maybe move Umbridge to the Ministry officials list, and Firenze to Magical creatures. Thoughts? --Lord Opeth (talk) 17:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

 * As it passed three days and there were no opinions against the merge, the Houses were moved to Hogwarts, and the founders and ghosts into Hogwarts staff.--Lord Opeth (talk) 00:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hogwarts houses


text:
Talk:Hogwarts headache

 * This page was nominated for deletion. Votes for deletion/Hogwarts headache.  The result was keep.

Hoax
I added the tag because though I have seen the New Journal page, I am still not convinced. There are many, many books far lengthier than the Harry Potter series. I've never heard any mention of Bible headache, for example. Not-notable to me, and possibly not even real. — Gary Kirk // talk! 14:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah. Thanks for explaining. It's true that the biggest Potters are not particularily long as huge books go (I recommend The Egyptian, by the way, if they translated it properly it's awesome), but keep in mind that the addictiveness of the series and the obsessiveness of the Harry Potter fandom are both famous, for good reason. You used the Bible as your example: Bibles are usually very small and in tiny text, while the Potters are children's books printed with good-sized, easy-to-read text. My Half-Blood Prince is about twice the size of my Bible, and both Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix are substantially bigger than that, true bug-squishers. Further, the sufferers described were children, whose tolerance of the strain (not to mention their reading speed) would be substantially lower. If the kids I knew are any indication I wouldn't swear by their knowledge of ergonomics, either. --Kizor 21:06, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Hogwarts headache


text:
Talk:House-elf

"Supporters of current Russian President, Vladimir Putin, have often accused the makers of the Harry Potter films to have deliberately modelled Dobby after the Russian president."

 * Isn't that a form of praise for Mr. Putin??
 * I've never noticed that, but now that it is mentioned I have to agree, he does look like Putin. Ha ha ha!

DB

 * In any case, it doesn't look much like the character as described in the book. ^_^'

I don´t think so Doidimais Brasil 20:27, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC).

Dobby in Australia section
I reverted away the section about "Dobby in Australia" but it has been put back in. Can anyone verify the information there, or is it something which should be eliminated? Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:26, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

I definitely have never heard of this 'dobby' section, and the second paragraph particularly I believe is offensive and should be deleted. Daydream believer2 07:35, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

I suspect it was simple vandalism, meant as a personal attack. If this is really a word used, let's have a source and perhaps it can somehow go into the article. If I see it go back in again as a personal attack, I'll certainly revert it on sight. If I see it go back without a personal attack, I imagine we should copy the text here and ask for verification. Friday (talk) 13:54, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Order of The Phoenix
Wait it says that Doby was in the Ordor of the Phoenix film. is there even an Order of the Phoenix film out yet

Now that the OotP film is out, and Dobby makes an appearence, the page should be editted to reflect it. --71.65.230.34 20:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Birthday
Dobby's birthday is on 28t June. The reference given (an article from MuggleNet) is from the 27 June, but that's only because MuggleNet is in the US: when JKR's website was updated to list Dobby's birthday, it was midnight on the 28 in the UK, but still the evening of the 27 in the US. PruneauT 11:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

dobby picture
what happened to that picture of dobby in HPATCOS? somebody please put it back up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.250.81 (talk • contribs)
 * It was deleted for not having source information. Throw 15:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

 * This should be incorprated into the article or deleted. See WP:TRIV John Reaves 05:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the entire trivia section sounds like a load of nonsense. Dobby has socialist leanings? Says who? I say that most of this section should be deleted unless it can be properly verified. Ldnew 02:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I removed the trivia section. Hope no-one minds. Serendipodous 19:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

 * Supporters of Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the makers of the Harry Potter films of modelling Dobby after Putin.
 * Some Harry Potter fans were against Warner Bros because Dobby was cut-off from each movie, after Chamber of Secrets.

Protection?
It appears the page is protected, but the standard Wiki box that announces the protection is missing.72.205.51.231 17:04, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Avada Kedavrhuh?!
"At the end of the film adaptation of The Chamber of Secrets, Dobby's intervention stopped Lucius Malfoy from completing the incantation of the famous killer curse which he was going to use on Harry in revenge for tricking him into releasing Dobby"...So Lucius Malfoy was going to attempt to kill Harry Potter right outside the Hogwarts Hospital Wing with Dumbledore 20 feet away? I dont remember that...--Problematik 01:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It was in the film, but I don't think it was in the book. I'm a little too lazy to walk over to my bookcase to check. But yeah, it should be deleted. Faithlessthewonderboy 00:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It sounds like he may have been going to attack/assault HP physically but definitely no evidence of Avada Kedavar:
 * Lucius Malfoy stood frozen, staring at the elf Then he lunged at Harry.
 * "You've lost me my servant, boy!"
 * But Dobby shouted, "You shall not harm Harry Potter!" There was a loud bang, and Mr. Malfoy was thrown backward.
 * Nil Einne (talk) 09:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Resembles Gollum
Dobby resembles Gollum in his speech manners and movements. But what in Harry Potter isn't derivative?

Major Spoilers
In the first sentence of this article there are major, major Deathly Hallows spoilers, and in the DH section. Can we get a spoiler tag here? RDMio 05:18, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Incorrect information in this article
It's Ron that says "we don't need any more Dobby's", not Harry.
 * Whats more, Dobbys was misspelt as "Dobbies". Fixed. Leemorrison 15:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge SPEW
I think that the article for the SPEW lacks of notability. Its larger section is a summary of what a house-elf is. I propose removing that section and merging the rest into this article. Lord Opeth 01:18, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The article is embarrassing to read, there barely anything to keep and transfer, but "Merge" it should be. Judgesurreal777 15:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Binding power
"House elves can also use their own brand of magic to 'bind' people to them, as Winky did to Barty Crouch Jr." I put this on the article. It is correct. Someone removed it. Can we agree this is correct? Leemorrison 18:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Removed by the same person: "They habitually refer to themselves in the third person and speak in a style reminiscent of young children." Equally correct. Leemorrison 18:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

 * I think the binding would be a part of the house elf magic that allows them to break the rules wizards have to live by. Barty Crouch probably ordered Winky to guard his son, and that allowed her to do so via the binding act.  It's simply a part of house elf magic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jclinard (talk • contribs) 23:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Individual pages discussion
Please participate in the discussion at Talk:Harry_Potter regarding having individual pages for characters rather than group pages. --billlund 21:19, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

 * That discussion has been archived at Talk:Harry Potter/archive 3. Brian Jason Drake 02:11, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

SPEW
I always liked SPEW. I would totally join if it were real. I don't think they were called the house elf liberation front originally, but there is a chapter by that name. I think the original name was ridiculously long because I remember Hermione couldn't fit it onto a pin. I will look it up sometime and change it if no one else does.
 * I believe you're right about the House Elf Liberation Front bit. Looks like someone added the long name, but left the mention of House Elf Liberation Front in. I'll look at the books tonight/tomorrow to check, and then fix it if necessary. --Mairi 05:12, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Erm, wasn't the House Elf Liberation Front a joke by Ron? I've just checked the book, and here's a direct quote of the only mention of the House-Elf liberation Front in that chapter of the same name- "Changed the name, have you?" said Ron, frowning at her. "What are we now then, the House-Elf Liberation Front?...". I believe the chapter was called this to outline how unsuccessful Hermione was at trying to encourage them to live individual lives. And the long name for the organisation was "Stop the Outrageous Abuse of Our Fellow Magical Creatures and Campaign for a change in Their Legal Status." Leemorrison 16:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Note to anyone intending on splitting off a section
This page has been processed by N-Bot, which, for browsing convenience, changes links to redirects to lists to links to the relevant list sections: e.g. Winky is changed to Winky.

As a result, anyone who intends to split a section out of this page should be aware that, as of 4 September 2005, the following sections were linked to from the following pages:

 * Winky: Hogwarts, Death Eater, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Barty Crouch, Barty Crouch Jr., Dobby, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (film), List of characters in the Harry Potter books, List of fictional people who are alcoholics, Canonical spells in the world of Harry Potter, Magical beasts (Harry Potter), Blood purity (Harry Potter), Minor Ministry officials in the Harry Potter books, SPEW

N-Bot (t/c) 06:00, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Can some one commment on their magic who's more informed? I remember someone saying they have their own "powerful brand of magic" or something?

"Mod-cons"?
What in the world are mod-cons? I'm only asking because unless it really fits in the article it shouldn't be there... Emily ( Funtrivia Freak ) 20:37, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

"Mod-cons" is a British English slang expression meaning modern conveniences, for example, "the kitchen comes with all mod-cons..." would mean a kitchen with a washing machine, fridge, freezer, dishwasher, etc. Obviously the expression changes and adapts to what is current, so something that was a "mod-con" in the 1950s might now be considered a necessary. In reference to the article though it makes the point that a "house-elf" is considered somewhat of a luxury that the Weasley's can't afford, the latest must have accessorie! (Of course bearing in mind that House Elves are slaves and don't demand any pay, why the Weasley's can't have one is a bit of a mystery!!)

They would most likely be sold in some sense.--Thank You Wiki (talk) 00:30, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Own purpose of Dobby?
removed: Dobby, however, often uses this magic for his own purposes, such as closing Platform 9¾ to try to protect Harry Potter.

I disagree. Dobby in MP2 is constantly tormenting Harry. I think Dobby was given an order (by Draco?) to harm Harry. So he does nasty tricks, but tries to soothe and excuse himself to Harry that he is preventing even worse things.

If Dobby wished to help Harry, he had plenty of more sensible ways - tell Dumbledore, for example.

 * Tell Dumbledore?! He couldn't even tell Harry anything! He belonged to the Malfoys and only did a few things to try to help Harry, before punishing himself. Brian Jason Drake 01:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Setting a house-elf free
"'Why d'you wear that thing, Dobby?' he asked curiously.

'This, sir?' said Dobby, plucking at the pillowcase. ''Tis a mark of the house-elf's enslavement, sir. Dobby can only be freed if his masters present him with clothes, sir. ...'" (CoS, UK, 133)

But the article gives the impression that giving clothes is only one way of setting a house-elf free, and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets says that it is the "traditional" way. Brian Jason Drake 02:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

"dobby can ONLY (ONLY ONLY ONLY) be freed if his masters present him with clothes..."

Didn't they look different in the books than the film?
I don't remember exactly how the books described them, but the thing I saw in the movie was different enough from my mental image that it can't have been right. Didn't the books say they had tiny little beady black eyes, rather than big humanlike ones? Anyway that's probably why Dobby didn't reappear in the subsequent films.. he was so JarJar-esque.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.72.21.221 (talk) 01:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC).
 * Nope, the books often described Dobby's eyes as orb-like, so the film representation was accurate. Leemorrison 16:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

To be more specific, the description is tennis ball like.--Thank You Wiki (talk) 00:33, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Hokey
An IP editor has been removing Hokey from this article, claiming that she is not notable enough to warrant inclusion. Obviously, I disagree. Any third opinions? faithless  (speak)  16:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I think she ought to be here, but she's not very big to have her own place like that. Have we seen enough House-elvs to warrent an "other House-elvs seen in the series" section? Keyblade Mage 21:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

 * Unless I'm mistaken, these are the only four house-elves in the series (not counting all the unnamed ones that work in the Hogwarts kitchens), though only Dobby and Kreacher really play any important part. But five sentences describing Hokey's role in the series is hardly excessive. faithless   (speak)  22:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Merge?
I saw on the noteability page, that it was agreed to merge House-Elves into "Beasts in Harry Potter". Please, where was it agreed to do so, because I missed it? And I see a pretty big problem with such a merge, namely that a House-Elf is not a beast (neither are the Goblin's or the centaurs, who already are in that article). Fantastic Beasts and where to find them differed between Beasts and Beings, therefore simply merging House-Elves, Goblins and centaurs into "Beasts in Harry Potter" is simply factually wrong. If you really think it absolutely necessary to merge that article, than at the very least we need to differe between Beasts and Beings on the "Beasts" article. Neville Longbottom 23:03, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Winkyhp.jpg
Image:Winkyhp.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:18, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

House-Elfs in OOTP film
I didn't see Dobby anywhere in the OOTP film, where was he? The elf in Sirius's house was Kreacher, and it seems to me unnecessary, and inaccurate, to call him an anonymous elf that was simply identified after the fact as Kreacher. Sirius, in fact, addresses him as Kreacher in the film. (Kenobifan (talk) 23:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC))
 * I think you've misread what the article says. The producers wished to cut him from the script before filming began, as he didn't play a large role in the film. In the original version of the script, he was a very minor character, probably just hanging around in the background, and therefore was not named (even though, obviously, it was Kreacher). When JKR told them that he was important, that's when they decided to flesh out the character a little, including having him addressed by name. Hope this helps. faithless   (speak)  00:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Considering that only Kreacher, and not Dobby, was restored, I have to wonder if that means that Kreacher will be taking over his role in the next two films. (Kenobifan (talk) 06:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC))

Merge proposal
After the general clean-up that has taken place in several groupal pages, it seems rather incredible that, while we have some articles like the Weasley family that lists over 15 characters, or the Hogwarts staff that lists almost 20 characters, we still have this really small page that features only 4 characters, 2 of which are really minor (Winky and Hokey). The house-elves are not a main subject in the Harry Potter stories as are the Death Eaters, the Order of the Phoenix, or the Hogwarts staff, and the article in general terms has not meet the guideline of Notability that we have applied previously on some other matters concerning Harry Potter that have been already merged, for example characters like McGonagall, all the Weasleys, Umbridge, Lupin, Bellatrix, or the Hogwarts houses, the subjects, the Deathly Hallows, and even notable creatures like ghosts or dementors. That's why I come with this proposal to merge this article into the Magical creatures (Harry Potter) one. Information regarding Characteristics and Ownership would be included in the main House-elves section in the Magical creatures article, and Dobby, Kreacher, Winky and Hokey would be included in the Characters section that already includes Griphook, Fawkes, Peeves, Hedwig, etc. The House-elves at Hogwarts section maybe moved to the article about Hogwarts. The S.P.E.W. is needless, it is basically a re-tell of information. Other minor organizations in Harry Potter like the Marauders, the Inquisitorial Squad or the Slug Club have already disappeared (so we can redirect it to Hermione's article or to the House-elf section).

I have made a Draft of the Magical creatures article to give you an idea of how this would look like. -- LøЯd  ۞pεth  03:14, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Support merge. Makes sense to me.  Exploding Boy (talk) 03:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Support - Lord Opeth knows better than most anyone which of these articles can be sources sufficiently to justify a whole article, and this one has shown not nearly enough to date, so I support a merge. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Well it's been more than a week and there is no opposition against this merge proposal, so the House-elves are now merged into the Magical creatures article. -- LøЯd  ۞pεth  22:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:House-elf


text:
Covenant of Baháʼu'lláh

In the Baháʼí Faith there are two covenants, deemed the 'greater' and 'lesser'. The greater covenant refers to an agreement of progressive revelation: that God will send messengers about every thousand years, and it is humanity's duty to recognize them and respond to their teachings. The lesser covenant is the agreement between the faith's founder, Baháʼu'lláh, and his followers, regarding the succession of leadership and the maintenance of unity.

Succession in the Baháʼí covenant was explicit and in written form, providing a clear chain of authority that led Baháʼís to follow ʻAbdu'l-Bahá as the authorized interpreter of Baháʼí scripture after Baháʼu'lláh's death, and the one who would lead the community. Baháʼu'lláh outlined the Universal House of Justice, a nine-member institution that could legislate on religious matters, and hinted at an appointed role for his descendants, both of which were elaborated upon by ʻAbdu'l-Bahá when he appointed Shoghi Effendi as the Guardian. The Universal House of Justice, first elected in 1963, remains the supreme governing body of the worldwide Baháʼí community. Anyone rejecting a link in this chain of leadership is regarded as a Covenant-breaker.

To Baháʼís, the Covenant of Baháʼu'lláh and its guarantee of unity represents a unique feature of their religion. For example, they regard the successorships of Jesus to Saint Peter and Muhammad to Ali as unwritten attempts to maintain unity that ultimately failed as their religions broke into contending factions. Through the covenant, the Baháʼí Faith prevented schism, and the several attempts to form alternative leadership have failed to attract a sizeable following due to their lack of scriptural authority.

Greater covenant
The greater covenant refers to the covenant all messengers from God make with their followers regarding the next messenger God will send for them. According to Bahá'u'lláh, the founder of the Bahá'í Faith, God promises to always send divine teachers to instruct humankind in a process known as progressive revelation. Bahá'ís believe prophecies pertaining to God's greater covenant are found in the scriptures of all religions, and each messenger from God specifically prophesies about the next one to come. For their part in the greater covenant, the followers of each religion have a duty to investigate with an open mind whether a person who claims to be the promised messenger of their faith does, or does not, spiritually fulfill relevant prophecies.

Manifestations of God
Bahá'ís conceive of God as a unique, eternal Being, the omnipotent omniscient creator of everything. Though infinitely exalted above his creation, God's loving will for it is faithfully conveyed to intelligent beings through a series of prophets or divine messengers referred to by Bahá'ís as Manifestations of God. In expressing God's will for this world they reveal social and spiritual principles and laws which educate human beings according to their capacities and the specific needs of the time and place in which each manifestation appears. As intermediaries between God and humanity what these divine teachers gave to people, over time, became the foundations for what are now known as the world's major religions.

Bahá'u'lláh says manifestations of God have a dual nature, both divine and human. Though not incarnations of God, they also are not ordinary mortals. Bahá'u'lláh likens all manifestations to pure polished mirrors created by God to perfectly reflect his knowledge and attributes in order to clearly manifest the Creator's will through prescriptive teachings they give to this world:"'... [God] hath ordained that in every age and dispensation a pure and stainless Soul be made manifest in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself. ... The second station is the human station... These Essences of Detachment, these resplendent Realities are the channels of God's all-pervasive grace.'"

Progressive revelation
Progressive revelation, a core teaching of the Bahá'í Faith, holds that religious truth is revealed by God progressively throughout history by his sending a series of divine manifestations, in fulfillment of God's promise in the greater covenant. This never-ending process was described by the Báb, one of the two manifestations of the Bahá'í Faith, in this way: "'The Lord of the universe hath never raised up a prophet nor hath He sent down a Book unless He hath established His covenant with all men, calling for their acceptance of the next Revelation and of the next Book; inasmuch as the outpourings of His bounty are ceaseless and without limit.'"Each manifestation of God brings a measure of revelation tailored to the population of the time and place in which he appears. Differences between revelations are not considered dependent upon the knowledge of a particular manifestation, but are instead attributed to various societal needs and factors reflecting the "conditions" and "varying requirements of the age" and the "spiritual capacity" of those being taught. By means of this school of divine guidance, humans have gradually evolved to achieve ever-widening circles of unity involving families, tribes, city-states, and most recently nations. Based on this concept, Bahá'ís accept the divine origin of all the world's major religions and see them as different stages of one great educational process ordained by God. Bahá'ís also believe Bahá'u'lláh is the most recent manifestation sent by God, and through the application of his teachings the human race will finally attain its collective maturity.

Prophecy
The nature and promise of God's greater covenant with all people is a key component of religious literature, expressed in both prophecies and mentioned by the divine teachers themselves.

Bahá'ís accept the Báb as fulfilling Islamic prophecies for the return of the Mahdi foretold by Muhammad; and see in Bahá'u'lláh the symbolic fulfillment of messianic and related eschatological prophecies of major world religions and groups. These include, for Judaism, the incarnation of the "Everlasting Father" from the Yuletide prophecy of Isaiah 9:6, the "Lord of Hosts"; for Christianity, the "Spirit of Truth" or "Comforter" predicted by Jesus in his farewell discourse of John 14-17 and the return of Christ "in the glory of the Father"; for Zoroastrianism, the return of Shah Bahram Varjavand; for Shi'a Islam the return of the Third Imam, Imam Husayn; for Sunni Islam, the return of Jesus, Isa; and for the Bábí Faith, He whom God shall make manifest. Bahá'ís also identify the advent of Bahá'u'lláh as fulfilling for "Hindus the reincarnation of Krishna", and for Buddhists the coming of the "fifth Buddha".

Obligations
Bahá'u'lláh teaches that individuals have a two-fold obligation to fulfill in response to God's promise to continually send messengers. The first is to recognize and accept the new manifestation when he comes, the second is to obey and put into practice the new teachings he brings; Bahá'u'lláh describes these twin duties are inseparable. In his Book of Laws he says:"The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recognition of Him Who is the Day Spring of His Revelation and the Fountain of His laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained unto all good... It behoveth every one who reacheth this most sublime station, this summit of transcendent glory, to observe every ordinance of Him Who is the Desire of the world. These twin duties are inseparable. Neither is acceptable without the other."As God fulfills His greater covenant through the process of progressive revelation, Bahá'u'lláh declares in his Book of Certitude that the Lord also tests the purity of heart and sincerity of those who claim to be devoted followers of a former manifestation whenever a new one appears. Such testing is done in various ways that make clear whether individuals are spiritually attuned enough to recognize God speaking through a new manifestation, or if they reject him by blindly clinging to traditions and misinterpretations of spiritual reality promoted by clergy.

Based on the fact that all manifestations speak for the same God, Bahá'u'lláh also points out that rejecting any one of God's manifestations is the same as rejecting them all: "Be thou assured in thyself that verily, he who turns away from this Beauty hath also turned away from the Messengers of the past and showeth pride towards God from all eternity to all eternity."

Lesser Covenant
To differentiate it from God's eternal greater covenant with humankind, Bahá'ís refer to a manifestation's agreement with his followers regarding whom they should turn to and obey immediately after his death as the lesser covenant.

Two distinctive features of the Bahá'í lesser covenant, which is referred to within the Bahá'í Faith as the Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh, are that it is explicit and also conveyed in authenticated written documents. This covenant is a means of protection from ideological splits. Since Bahá'u'lláh's specific divine mission is to bring about world unity, securing the lasting unity of his religion is the guarantee of achieving that goal. 'Abdu'l-Bahá, Bahá'u'lláh's eldest son, explains:"The first condition is firmness in the Covenant of God. For the power of the Covenant will protect the Cause of Bahá'u'lláh from the doubts of the people of error. It is the fortified fortress of the Cause of God and the firm pillar of the religion of God. Today no power can conserve the oneness of the Bahá'í world save the Covenant of God; otherwise differences like unto a most great tempest will encompass the Bahá'í world. It is evident that the axis of the oneness of the world of humanity is the power of the Covenant and nothing else. Had the Covenant not come to pass, had it not been revealed from the Supreme Pen and had not the Book of the Covenant, like unto the ray of the Sun of Reality, illuminated the world, the forces of the Cause of God would have been utterly scattered and certain souls who were the prisoners of their own passions and lusts would have taken into their hands an axe, cutting the root of this Blessed Tree."Intimately linked to following all guidance from his appointed successor, provisions in Bahá'u'lláh's covenant further enjoin individuals and entire Bahá'í communities to lovingly support the leadership of all administrative institutions Bahá'u'lláh ordained for his Faith.

In the Bahá'í Faith every believer is welcome to hold personal theological opinions, but they should not press them upon others. Being firm in the covenant of Bahá'u'lláh, loyal to its provisions, and having unshakable confidence that decisions of the authority at center of the Baha'i Faith reflects the will of God, is a chief spiritual virtue for Bahá'ís.

Kitáb-i-ʻAhd
Bahá'u'lláh established the successorship of the Bahá'í Faith with a document called the Kitáb-i-`Ahd (the Book of the Covenant), written in his own hand and entrusted before his death to 'Abdu'l-Bahá. In this document Bahá'u'lláh reaffirmed his mission from God, exhorted the peoples of the world to observe that which will elevate them, and forbade conflict and contention, while succinctly and emphatically placing successorship of the Faith in the hands of the Most Mighty Branch, a title reserved exclusively for 'Abdu'l-Bahá.

Years earlier in late Edirne period (September 1867–August 1868) Bahá'u'lláh composed a document entitled the Tablet of the Branch in which he announced the high station of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, titled Ghuṣn-i-A‘ẓam (‘the Greatest Branch’), foreshadowing His later appointment in the Kitáb-i-‘Ahd as successor, and in his Book of Laws he decreed that after his death Bahá'ís should turn towards "Him Whom God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root". When the Kitáb-i-'Ahd was read after his death, Bahá'u'lláh's previous references to 'Abdu'l-Bahá in these two documents were confirmed and then fully understood by believers. Unlike past religions, in conferring upon 'Abdu'l-Bahá the station and authority of being the Center of his Covenant, Bahá'u'lláh in numerous statements also made clear that 'Abdu'l-Bahá was a unique enduring model for others to emulate as God had endowed him with "perfection in personal and social behavior".

Further developments
In his own Will and Testament, 'Abdu'l-Bahá extended Bahá'u'lláh's lesser covenant with believers by appointing his eldest grandson Shoghni Effendi the Guardian and head of the Bahá'í Faith. Bahá'u'lláh's covenant had bestowed upon 'Abdu'l-Bahá the position of being the sole authorized interpreter of the holy writings of the Faith. In his will, 'Abdu'l-Bahá subsequently designated the same role and authority to Shoghi Effendi as "the expounder of the words of God".

'Abdu'l-Bahá also affirmed in his will that, in addition to the Guardian, the Universal House of Justice, established in Bahá'u'lláh's Book of Laws as the supreme legislative body of his Faith, was the other Bahá'í institution given global leadership and authority in the Faith. The mandate of the Universal House of Justice is to make or enact laws on any matter not expressly revealed in Bahá'í scriptures, and Bahá'u'lláh promises that God will "inspire them with whatsoever He willeth." The Universal House of Justice became the head of the Bahá'í Faith upon its election in 1963 by Bahá'ís from around the world.

The covenant of Bahá'u'lláh is specifically referred to by Shoghi Effendi as the means of directing and canalizing the spiritual forces released by Bahá'u'lláh's revelation in this world, and to "insure their harmonious and continuous operation after His ascension". He further stated the purpose of Bahá'u'lláh's covenant is to preserve the Faith's influence and integrity, to protect its unity, and to stimulate its growth around the planet.

title: Covenant of Baháʼu'lláh


text:
Talk:Knight Bus

I am about to remove a section from the Stan Shunpike part regarding his arrest in HPB. Someone compared this to the arrest of people in the So-Called War on Terror (which is a misnomer if you ask me). Let me first say, I agree with the sentiment and think you may be correct, but unless Rowling has given any indication of this, I think it should be considered speculation and/or wishful thinking. And like I said, I'm not removing it because I don't agree with the analogy, as an anarchist I think it is perfect, but to say Rowling is criticizing the So-Called War on Terror" is absurd unless you can back it up.

Note to anyone intending on splitting off a section
This page has been processed by N-Bot, which, for browsing convenience, changes links to redirects to lists to links to the relevant list sections: e.g. Ernie Prang is changed to Ernie Prang.

As a result, anyone who intends to split a section out of this page should be aware that, as of 4 September 2005, the following sections were linked to from the following pages:

 * Stan Shunpike: Cockney, Death Eater, Ministry of Magic, Knight Bus, Wizarding world, Rufus Scrimgeour
 * Ernie Prang: Knight Bus, Wizarding world, Jimmy Gardner (British actor)

N-Bot (t/c) 18:30, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Area of operation includes Wales?
I'm pretty certain I recall the KB calling at a Welsh town in PoA, letting off Madam Marsh (the vomitously green passenger who seems to turn up every time :-). If so, we can remove the "(presumably)". HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 12:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Shunpike and Politics
As to whether Stan Shunpike's arrest and imprisonment are intended as a comment on current events, I presume they are not, directly. But there is certainly widespread talk about it.

Rowling herself brings up Shunpike in relation to terrorism in an interview here: http://www.mugglenet.com/jkrinterview2.shtml

Discussion of the Shunpike metaphor can be found in mainstream media, e.g., "When Harry Met Osama", http://www.slate.com/id/2123105/

This issue reminds me of the speculation that L. Frank Baum's story "The Wizard of Oz" was a parable about the silver vs. gold monetary issue of the 1890s, with the yellow brick road (supposedly the gold standard), the silver slippers (ruby only in the movie), the cowardly lion (William Jennings Bryan), the scarecrow (farmers), the tin woodsman (industrial workers), etc., etc. Of course it doesn't fit together into any kind of tidy critique of 1890s politics, and I doubt that Baum had that in mind. HOWEVER, he wrote the story when the fury was at its height, and he was undoubtedly influenced.

When I was in college, I wrote a story set in medieval times, and the professor showed it to the class as a retelling of Watergate. "That's not what I meant!" I said, but he pointed out parallel after parallel after parallel, and I had to admit he had a point. Watergate was in the air, and I breathed it.

Anyway, I would think the widespread discussion of the Shunpike case merits at least passing mention in the article, if only to say that there is little or no evidence Rowling intended it as commentary.

Belated signature: Kestenbaum 14:45, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Knight Bus


text:
Talk:Legilimency

"This is seen quite impressively in the sixth book, when he blocks every single spell before Harry can finish it. It seems, though, that a duel against such powerful Legilimentes can only be successful through an equally proficient use of Occlumency."

Using non-verbal spells would help, however, since it would take split seconds away from the Legilimens ability to know what spell is being cast. In HBP, Snape yells at Harry, "Blocked again and again and again until you learn to keep your mouth shut and your mind closed, Potter!" (Ch. 28 Flight of the Prince)

Believeinlove 14:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

RFC - "Legilimency" or "Legilimency and Occlumency"??
I've merged the old Legilimency and Occlumency articles together, as there isn't much verifiable information for either. I've put them both at "Legilimency", redirecting Occlumency to it. But do people think it would be better to have the combined page at "Legilimency and Occlumency", and have both pages redirect to it? Happy-melon 09:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Shield charms and legilimency
In the article, it is mentioned that legilimency can be blocked by a shield charm; however, doesn't the shield charm also reverse the spell, causing the shield charm caster to see the memories of the legilimens? That's what happened in the Order of Pheonix when Harry casted the shield charm in Snape's lesson. Shmooshkums 18:58, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you're right. However, given that this particular ship is leaking like a seive and is going to sink in a day or so (see the AfD), I'm not in any rush to correct it.  Happy-melon 19:02, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Legilimency


text:
Talk:List of Quidditch teams

Indonesia
Where's the source about Indonesia? There is nothing about that in Quidditch through the ages

 * Like loads of other people, I've removed it (again) - this is fanfiction rather than information from the HP canon. Also removed Cairo Crystals, Neverland Nifflers and Tokyo Terriors - the last one also listed local teams as competing in the World Cup rather than countries.  Tobelia 12:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Merge in Quidditch team lists
Why do we need four lists? There is no need, the lists are not notable, put together they have a much better chance. Judgesurreal777 04:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:List of Quidditch teams