Talk:Half-Blood Prince (character)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Voldemort & Snape vs. Marauders
"This title gives Snape similarity to Lord Voldemort in that they are both dark wizards (with a muggle father and a witch mother) who gave themselves new names later on in their lives."
I don't see the support for this assumption. Remus Lupin (Moony), Sirius Black (Padfoot), James Potter (Prongs) and Peter (Wormtail) called themselves the Maruaders and all gave themselves nicknames. You can't say that they did the same thing as Voldemort. Severus Snape did the same thing, he called himself the Half Blood Prince but did not change his name in the common wizard world. He was and still is Severus Snape. Tome Riddle did something different. He changed his name from Tom (because it was normal) and made it Voldemort. Since that point Tom Riddle ceased to exist (in the common wizard's view) and Voldemort was born. This was not (as mentioned) anywhere close to what Snape did.
- Well, I understand what you mean, but there is also another point that needs to be brought up; both Snape and Voldemort gave themselves names of high status; "Lord" and "Prince." "Marauders" isn't exactly boastful, now, is it?
- I don't see the support for this assumption.
What assumption? No one ever claimed that Snape and Voldemort were the only dark sizards who gave themselves new names. No one ever claimed that anyone who gives themselves a new name is bad. Brian Jason Drake 08:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- Please sign your posts! Brian Jason Drake 08:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Snape doesn't give himself the title prince, it is his mother's surname. It is an amusing pun, but we don't really know why he got the nickname, and in fact it is rather an insult amongst the sort of people in Slytherin house. So it is very different to Voldemort's choice. And while Voldemort chose a garand and important sounding name, Marauders means people who go out and steal, rape, destroy etc etc. Sandpiper 09:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Factual Inaccuracies
You seem to be missing the point that half-blood is generally an insult to a wizard. So who picks an insult as a name in order to boost their prestige? Or at all? It has not been established who coined this name for Snape. The best suggestion I have seen is that Lilly used it as a nickname for her friend. She had no wizard blood parents, so from her lowly point of view she could call snape prince and half blood and mean someone socially above her, so it would be a funny sort of compliment.
It has not been established who owned the book during the time Snape was taking those potions lessons. It has not been established who wrote in it, only that it is all in the same handwriting. Snape has only stated that he invented the two spells also written into the potions book. The spells are known to have been invented before the year for which this was potions textbook.
Now, Lilly Potter, who was in the same year as snape and probably his classmate, was repeatedly described as the best potions student. I do not recall anyone saying this of Snapes mother Eileen, nor of snape.Sandpiper 13:21, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
EDIT: Sorry but Half-Blood is absolutely not an insult! It is like pure-blood and muggle-born a correct description of somene´s blood status. Mudblood, blood traitor and muggle lover are insults. The majority of wizards are half-bloods btw.
And Snape was most definitely the best potions student Slughorn ever had. Sluggy said that he never saw anyone but Harry making such a perfect "draught of living death" at the first attempt "I believe not even you Severus.".
Lily was good in potions but Snape was the best.
The hand writing was described exactly as Snape´s writing was described in the pensieve scene in OotP. And the fact that it was Eileen´s old book explains why Snape wrote in it before his 6th year.
- Sorry again;
- There is an interview with JKR where she states that being described as a half-blood would be considered an insult by any pure-blood wizard, given apparently in a newsround interview re book four, which can be seen here: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizworld/blood-status-names.html
- 'From the beginning of Philosophers Stone, prejudice is a very strong theme. It is plausible that Harry enters the world wide-eyed: everything will be wonderful and it's the sort of place where injustices don't happen. Then he finds out that it does happen and it's a shock to him. He finds out that he is a half-blood: to a wizard like Lucius Malfoy, he will never be a true wizard, because his mother was of muggle parentage. It's a very important theme.'
- We are now talking about Snape, whose father rather than mother is a muggle, but Lucius is his direct contemporary at Hogwarts. It applies exactly to Lucius/Snape as it does to Lucius or Draco/Harry. JKR is stating that a pure blood would look down on anyone described as a half blood. It is an insult, not a compliment.
- I take the point about the majority of wizards being half bloods, though we do not know the true proportion, and after 2 generations they would count as pure-blood by definition (though maybe not in the eyes of the old established families). But we are talking about Slytherins, who are very much of this opinion. many went off and became death eaters.
- Why do you claim Snape was the best potions student Slughorn had? Slughorn says lily was his best student, and never even mentions Snape (except to say lily was better than him despite his now being a professor). Or, as you quote, to say that harry plus book did better than Snape did in class. Which might be odd if it was Snapes book, whereas if it was lilys book then it would not be surprising that Harry did better than Snape following advice from the actual top student.
- We do not know it was eileen's book. We only know it was old enough to have been her book, so it would have been second hand when Snape/lily were using it. It has only one sort of writing, and Snape definitely claimed to have created a couple of the spells in it, so it is unlikely that his mother was responsible for any of the writing.Sandpiper 17:11, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
Another Edit: That it was Eileen´s book only explains why Snape was using it before his 6th year, as mentioned above.
Slughorn says that Lily was great in Potions, he never says that she was the best. You say he did so I´m searching my book (UK edition) but unsuccessfully. "One of the brightest I ever had." but never “the best”.
"Nobody has ever made such a perfect potion at the first attempt, I believe not even you Severus." implies that Snape was holding the record until now. He wasn´t so good at the first attempt because he probably had to work out the additions he wrote down first.
"Half-Blood" is certainly an insult when coming from Lucius Malfoy, much like "Jew" was and is meant as an insult from certain circles but you can´t say "Half- Blood is generally considered an insult in the wizarding world." but something like "It is peculiar that Snape, who was already socializing with a gang of future Death Eaters in school, would emphasize the fact that he is a half blood."
- What evidence is there that snape used the book before his 6th year?
- I recall seeing a list of references where slughorn talks about how good lily was (there are several). If I remember where it was, I shall post it. You may be right that he never says she was his best ever student, but bearing in mind she and snape were in the same classes, it is Lily (not snape) that slughorn keeps saying was best. He never says she was nearly as good as snape, never mentions snapes performance as a student. Which would be odd, if in fact snape was the better student. This would be doubly surprising if in fact snape had already been using the book before the classes proper started. It could really only be explained if he was helping her, and deliberatly doing badly himself. The more simple explanation was that she was the best and he copied her. This would be entirely consistent with his making the notes, watching what she was doing in class. We have a comment about Snapes handwriting, but I dont recall one about lilies. I doubt anyone would be writing notes in a book margin in large writing, so it could equally be her own notes in her copy of the book.
- It remains peculiar that Snape would refer to himself as a half blood in the company of his fellow slytherin pure-bloods. It might be that most of the world would not regard 'jew' as an insult, but if you were trying to make friends with members of the nazi party, I doubt you would do well by calling yourself the half-jew Arian. At best it would be a very flat joke against yourself.
- I have seen some comment about pure-blood families dying out. Yet my impression is that many/most of the wizards we know about are pure-blood, and the half-bloods are all related to pure blood families. Statistically this sounds to me as though pure bloods have to still be the majority, at least taking the definition of only counting back to grandparents. The particular case we are arguing about seems to be the truly pure blooded which are counting endless generations without known muggle ancestors. So actual half-bloods may in fact be the minority. Voldemort had no intention of letting anyone know he was a half-blood, and I do not see why Snape would either.Sandpiper 00:50, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Me again: Peculier indeed. None of us knows whom he did let know apart from Harry. There are so many possibilities of how the name came into being and who knew about it or who knew, at least, that he was a half-blood, that I would rather discuss it in a real discussion board. The wikipedia should be about facts. In HBP it is however specifically stated (by Hermione) that the Death Eaters don´t mind half bloods in their club.
Snape invented Levicorpus ("Don´t you dare use my own spells against me.") before or during Lupin´s and therefore his own fith year (Lupin tells Harry that it was used all around school then.). We also know that he invented it inside the book, because Harry tells us about the crossing outs. So we know for a fact that Snape used the book before his sixth year to invent spells.
Hermione wasn´t researching Eilleen Prince for nothing. She only found her because she searched for fitting people who were at school at the time the book was printed. Of course Eilleen wasn´t very good at potions and so Hermione dismissed her as a possibility. This was supposed to tell us that it was originally Eileen´s book and that her half-blooded son, who inherited the book, is the HBP. Some things in the book actually added up, you know.
Slughorn is talking about Lily to Harry, because she is Harry´s mother! Why would he point out that Harry´s .... potions master was good at potions? You can be sure that Slughorn doesn´t talk about Lily so much when chatting with Blaise Zabini.
I already quoted twice that Slughorn said that *nobody*, not *even* Severus has ever impressed him as much as Harry. So there is one instance where he uses Snape as an example for the absolute peak of potions brilliance and there is no such instance for Lily, although he certainly calls her talented and bright repeadedly. (I should probably find out how to sign up here)
- Hi 84.115. You can still sign your posts with 4 tilde symbols even without registering a name, though you could do that too to help everyone know the same people are chating. The most difficult bit of signing up is, as always, choosing a name.
- To start at the end. Well, yes, he would talk about Harry's relatives when talking to Harry. But that does not mean he would make things up, he is represented pretty much as a good guy. So if Lily had been terrible, he would have said so. He says she was brilliant. We have already been told that Snape is good at potions previously, now JKR is making a point of plugging Lily. I agree the comments about Lily are frequently oblique and incomplete, but they are all pushing her as top student. As I remember it, snape interrupts slughorn as he is talking about her with harry, hence whatever slughorn might have said about Lily is now tempered by Snape becoming part of the conversation. I don't see Slughorn telling Snape to his face that Lily was better than him.
- I don't know what the age of the book is supposed to tell us. Hermione uses it as a historical starting date to search for who owned it. But the only thing we are told for sure about it is that Snape was the HBP, and it is inscribed as his property. It just as likely was bought second hand at the start of year 6.
- I would go back to the potions book not being used before year 6. I do not remember what crossings out there were. If it says they were in 'levicorpus', then I really do not believe Snape wrote them. he had that spell worked out in/before year 5. I do not see why he would have made working notes inside some old book he had no other reason to be using at the time. If he was working through the potions book and writing notes about potions before year 6, then by the time the actual classes started he would have got the potions right, and again it would have been him who was apparently brilliantly creating perfect potions in class (but that time working from his own earlier notes, not notes written by someone else as Harry did.). I find it more credible that crossings out imply mistakes, as in someone learning for the first time. So it might be Lily learning the spell from Snape and making mistakes.
- As to the death eaters and blood, I recall mentions of the DE conducting pogroms against non pure-blood wizards? Someone also expresses themselves very shocked at discovering Voldemort was a half blood, after Harry lets out the secret (in goblet of fire?). And for my money, there is a possibility that the secret referred to in the locket note from RAB is that Voldemort is not a pure blood wizard, rather then anything about him creating horcruxes. It sounds exactly the sort of discovery which might tip over one of his fanatical supporters into becoming a fanatical hater....if his hero suddenly turns out to be one of those despised half-bloods. To mix our articles, just the sort of discovery which would turn someone like regulus Black into Voldemort's enemy.Sandpiper 01:54, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
No, the DEs conduct pogroms against mudbloods and muggles at most. Half-bloods are not despised and not kept in any way from joining the DEs. Hermione, and therfore JK Rowling, explains that in the last book.
Pure-bloods consider themselves the best and the ones who should lead the Wizarding World, half-bloods are accepted second class citizens.
I think that Snape invented the spells inside the book because JKR let Harry state it as a fact. Sometimes Harry has to come to the right conclusions or the author would have no way to tell the readers what's going on.
I agree that Snape worked at the potions in the book in his sixth year. He most likely worked with it for years. Lily might have seen/worked with the book. There is no proof for that yet, it's just a theory you seem to like. She might have given him the name HBP, but it's just a theory. What we know is that he calls himself HBP. We don't know who came up with the name.
If Hermione found out about the HBP through her research, she did the right research! Finding Eileen Prince enabled her to find out that Severus is her son. So it is no coincidence that Eileen was in school at the same time the book was printed. Why would it be a coincidence when everything fits together and led Hermione to the right conclusion in the end?
-me 5th of October 2005
- Try this, came across it and havn't checked the reference myself, but I fancy it is correct. At least one death eater, when asked, seems to agree with regard to the standing of half-bloods. Scene in the department of mysteries at the end of phoenix:
- 'Shut your mouth!' Bellatrix shrieked. 'You dare speak his name with your unworthy lips, you dare besmirch it with your half-blood's tongue, you dare-'
- 'Did you know he'a a half-blood too?' said Harry recklessly. Hermoine gave a little moan in his ear. 'Voldemort? Yeah, his mother was a witch but his dad was a Muggle - or has he been telling you lot he's pure-blood?'
- 'STUPEF-'.....
- 'He dared - he dares--' shrieked Bellatrix incoherently, 'he stands there - filthy half-blood-' "Sandpiper 00:52, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Or Harry, discussing with Hermione what sort of person the prince might be HBP227uk ch12 if he'd been a budding Death Eater he wouldn't have been boasting about being "Half-Blood", would he
Although Hermione replies, The death Eaters can't all be pure-bloods. There arent enough pure-blood wizards left....It's only muggle borns they hate, they'd be quite happy to let you and Ron join up
(which is actually a bit odd, since Ron is a pure-blood anyway? And in Harry's case, I doubt it would be everyones first concern) Sandpiper 20:23, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Merge
Shouldn't this article be merged with Severus Snape? I see no reason really to leave this on its own - seperate from whom this person really is. K1Bond007 19:33, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
- Well it could be, and arguably it should be. The problem would be that snapes article seems to get chopped down a lot, and this might then be considered excessively long compared to the rest of the article. But what that really means is the snape article has information missing. Also perhaps, a discussion of the half blood prince should include the process the kids go through to find it out. Arguably this is mostly researching snapes biography, but others might disagree and start chopping... I would include it all pretty much as a much more detailed replacement of the existing section in snape, but only if there is consensus to keep it allSandpiper 19:59, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
Merged? Just delete it. Most of this article is just a lengthy, useless synopsis. The last paragraph is some fan drawing parallels between Snape and Voldemort giving themselves new names. (Amazing!) All pertinent, necessary information on the Prince/Prince as plot device should already be on their respective pages. Guermantes 03:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
- No, this article draws together the important points of the story which are otherwise spread throughout the book. This subject has been the source of considerable debate in the outside world. The article would be much more interesting if it had a second section added discussing the main theories about the book, its owner, and the possible relationships between the characters. This could even be referenced from recognised HP websites. But I think it is sufficient to leave the details without further comment. It should be recognised that this article exists because of the interest in this subject. Sandpiper 12:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia isn't the place for fan theories and speculation. It's an encyclopedia. Guermantes 06:50, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed, but encyclopedias exist because they contain information people want to read. If thay fail to do this, then they fail completely. Sandpiper 11:07, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia isn't the place for fan theories and speculation. It's an encyclopedia. Guermantes 06:50, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image
While I generally like having an image to go with an article, I question how appropriate this one is. It would make more sense in the HBP article about the book itself, not about the character. Including a picture of the character would, of course, render the spoiler warning pointless unless the picture was put low enough in the article to not be revealed unless a reader intentionally scrolled down. Thoughts? --Icarus 08:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- This image is already on the HBP book page, along with those of other cover pictures. It is however, the most relevant image which anyone has come up with: the story of the HBP is all about the potions book, presumably why they chose it as cover picture. I put it in because (apart from being relevant) a block of text looks better if there is a picture to break it up.Sandpiper 09:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yep, caption helpsSandpiper 20:51, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- I cropped it so it only showed the textbook, to try and help make the fact that this is the article about the character and not Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince clearer. GracieLizzie 11:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Slughorn comparing Snape and Harry
Further to mention in article of possibility of Lily and Snape being rivals at potions, and what Slughorn actually says about them.
Slughorm mentions Lily's ability at potions many times, but only mentions Snape's once.He is talking about Harry:
But I don't think I've ever known such a natural at potions!'said Slughorn... 'Instinctive, you know - like his mother! I've only ever taught a few with this kind of ability, I can tell you that, Sybill -why, even Severus-'...(Slughorn notices Snape and pulls him into the conversation)'...come join us Severus...I was just talking about Harry's exceptional potion-making... you should have seen what he gave me first lesson...never had a student produce finer on a first attempt, I don't think even you, Severus- HBP p299uk ch15, slug club party.
Slughorn does not finish what he was going to say about Severus, because he notices him listening. He then resumes by commenting that Harry made a better Living Death, first go, than any other student. Then he is interrupted again before he finishes saying what Snape did. But Slughorn does comment that Harry has shown the same instinctive ability, by cheating from the book, as his mother showed.
Anyway, this section does not actually say whether Slughorn remembers Snape either being good or bad at potions. Sandpiper 18:54, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
What the fuck? Slughorn stops himself because he says "Severus" and then actually looks for Severus to include him into the conversation, because he is a social guy. People do that all the time. "My wife bought beautiful flowers last spring - Honey - what where these flowers called that you found last spring?"
And what he wants to say is very clear: Nobody made a better potion at the first attempt, not even Severus. Nobody made a better potion at the first attempt, not even you Severus. He finishes that sentence twice! The '-' gives us an idea about the way Slughorn talks. It makes you hear his voice, it helps with his characterization. The message was more than complete and it was even repeated, without changing a bit.
Oh yeah, and that obviously means that Snape is the best potions student Slughoorn remembers, otherwise he wouldn't have to point out that he wasn't as good as Harry, after he already said that he thinks nobody was ever as good as Harry.
- No, the problem with the quote is exactly that he does not finish speaking and it is not clear why he mentions severus at all. He might have been going to say 'why even Severus wasn't a natural like that'. Most obviously he might have said 'why even Severus made a total mess of it first time'. Next time he might have been going to say 'I don't think even you, Severus, could have found fault with what he did'. The tantalising thing is that the quote exactly does not say, so we are left guessing. Also, Severus is someone who Slughorn might naturally compare anyone to, on the basis of his current reputation (which is undeniably good), rather than how well he did at school in the subject. Again, we don't know...except that there is no other reference anywhere to how good or bad snape was at school in potions.Sandpiper 18:26, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Categorization
Should this be in Category:Alter egos? APclark 12:14, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
- Despite occupying quite a bit of book space and telling us something about the characters, it is not clear if the nickname was ever really used Sandpiper 01:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Move proposal
As Order of the Phoenix is an article on the Order, not a redirect to the book, I propose moving this article to Half-Blood Prince. The book is linked in the opening paragraph anyway. Laur 18:43, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- There is a distinction, i think. At the start of order of the phoenix we already know what the order is, and the book of that title goes on to tell us more. However, the half-blood prince is a mystery story and we do not find out who it is until the very end. So the issue is whether it is a good plan for people expecting to read a synopsis of the book as a whole to find themselves with a relatively quick explanation of the the puzzle instead. i don't recall, but possibly the book article does not even reveal who the prince is.
- Against my own argument, I am starting to loose faith in spoiler warnings. I think they should be there, but anyone who is looking up characters in an encyclopedia should reasonably expect to find the important parts of their stories. But in this case I am a little bothered about the possibility of people arriving here by accident and thus reading more than they realised. On the other hand, i do wonder who is ever going to think to type in HBP(character)Sandpiper 00:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- This is an encyclopedia first, and spoiler warnings should always take second place. If we have to choose between encyclopedic content and potentially spoiling the book for somone, spoil away. savidan(talk) (e@) 05:11, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- I hadn't yet read the book when I clicked on HBP in the Categories out of curiosity, so I didn't know that discovering his identity was the major plotline of the book. So, I'm glad that it didn't just redirect to Severus Snape, or reveal the mystery right beneath the spoiler warning without having to scroll down first. Thanks for revealing it only at the end, since it allowed me to decide how much to read about the character and how much of the solution I wanted spoiled. I added a line to the introduction to let readers know why there is a spoiler warning. GUllman 23:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- This is an encyclopedia first, and spoiler warnings should always take second place. If we have to choose between encyclopedic content and potentially spoiling the book for somone, spoil away. savidan(talk) (e@) 05:11, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- Against my own argument, I am starting to loose faith in spoiler warnings. I think they should be there, but anyone who is looking up characters in an encyclopedia should reasonably expect to find the important parts of their stories. But in this case I am a little bothered about the possibility of people arriving here by accident and thus reading more than they realised. On the other hand, i do wonder who is ever going to think to type in HBP(character)Sandpiper 00:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Chronology Problem
I'm just thinking out loud but when Harry checks the date of the book it is from 60 years ago. He explicitly says neither his father nor his friends were at school back then. This would disqualify Severus. I understand the book could be a hand-me-down but school books seldom can be used for 20 years at a time. I guess my question is, has Rowlings confirmed Snape is the Prince or might he have been lying? The date of the book seems signifigant to me.
- IIRC, Snape wasn't exactly rolling in the dough back then, so he could easily have been using a hand-me-down book. --Deathphoenix ʕ 02:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
- Are you sure Severus is one of James's "friends"? Brian Jason Drake 03:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Well obviously they werent friends but we've seen that they were in school together and many people have referenced them being contemporaries
- If Severus wasn't one of James's friends then is it relevant that neither James nor his friends were at Hogwarts 60 (isn't it 50?) years ago? Brian Jason Drake 10:29, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- He was a classmate but they werent friends because they hated each other. The book is still 50 years old. Voldemort was there then but James and Snape would be too young to belong to that class. We don't have precise dates for James and Snape's tenure at Hogwarts. However, if they were there 50 years ago, even if they only used that book in their first year Snape, James, and Sirius would be in their 60's now and Snape and Sirius at least don't seem that old. It just doesn't seem to add up. The book is at least twenty years older than it should be to be Snape's. A book could be a hand-me-down but 20 years without a new eddition? That's an old text book.--Darkling235 02:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- The fact of using the same textbook is a different issue to whose it is. If it comes to that, with 40 people a year being all the wizarding children ever likely to want a copy, in 50 years they can only have sold 2000 copies. If there was a new one even every 20 years, it would only be 800 copies all together. In fact rather less than this if it only the advanced textbook, say sales of 20 copies each year? I suspect wizrds are rather backwards in some things.
- Supposedly Harry was at school from 1980, the marauders, Lily and snape around 1958, the book about 1936 so class of 1930. You would think that someone ought to have produced a new edition by now, especially since Snape seems to have had a considerably improved copy in his storeroom for some time, but that is just another little mystery. Sandpiper 07:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- He was a classmate but they werent friends because they hated each other. The book is still 50 years old. Voldemort was there then but James and Snape would be too young to belong to that class. We don't have precise dates for James and Snape's tenure at Hogwarts. However, if they were there 50 years ago, even if they only used that book in their first year Snape, James, and Sirius would be in their 60's now and Snape and Sirius at least don't seem that old. It just doesn't seem to add up. The book is at least twenty years older than it should be to be Snape's. A book could be a hand-me-down but 20 years without a new eddition? That's an old text book.--Darkling235 02:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge
I just put a merge template on the page (merge into Severus Snape) because these two characters are essentially the same person. Please discuss this below, especially if you do not want the pages to be merged. CattleGirl talk | e@ | review me! 10:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- It will spoil the sixth book for readers. Also, that merger notice at the top of the Snape page was an outrageous spoiler. Michaelsanders 11:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- It's far to spoilerish and I don't think it is unreasonable to have an article discussing the Half-Blood Prince as a plot point rather than just the character themself... i.e. Snape, which should remain in Snape's article. --GracieLizzie 13:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- This was discussed a year ago (see above) and someone even posted a thanks essentially for not merging it. My own view is that this was a sufficiently important topic in its own right to merit its own article. I was always of the view that the story deserved a detailed explanation, but others were also of the view that such a long explanation should not be inserted into the Severus Snape page, which has a shortened version of the story. So the logical result of that was to retain the long version here. I also suspect that this story is not finished with, we will hear more about it in book 7. Sandpiper 14:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- It's far to spoilerish and I don't think it is unreasonable to have an article discussing the Half-Blood Prince as a plot point rather than just the character themself... i.e. Snape, which should remain in Snape's article. --GracieLizzie 13:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)