Talk:Harry Potter Lexicon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Harry Potter, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter universe. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | ||||||
|
|||||||
I know this article is short, but that's because it's not finished.
Is "canonity" a word? RickK 01:09, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I meant that they are very considered with what is canon. I'm not very good at spelling.
- I think you want "canonicity". Items of unquestioned "canonicity" are "canonical". -- Someone else 01:57, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I'm sure your right, but I don't know which word to replace it with, your sentance is too confusing.
[edit] VfD
- Harry Potter Lexicon - about a website. Seems like a bad precedent to have entries about fan websites. Title also confusing, seems like the article is a lexicon of Harry Potter terms, but isn't. M123 00:37, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)
- Del. --Menchi 01:08, Aug 24, 2003 (UTC)
- The Harry Potter Lexicon is more than a "fan site." You won't find an article on a charactor from Harry Potter that dosen't have external link to a page on the Harry Potter Lexicon(see Lord Voldemort for instance). And in the context where the link is found, it is clear that the Harry Potter Lexicon is not "article is a lexicon of Harry Potter terms"(see Professor Quirrell)
- The site is not an official Harry Potter website, it was designed by a fan -- hence "fan website". If this is allowed to exist people will write about all sorts of unecyclopedic websites and the wiki will fill with spam for websites. Also, the "Professor Quirrell" mention was added by you. The context is not at all clear when I see an article title "X Lexicon", I expext it to be a lexicon on X, not some kid blabbing about a website they like. M123 16:08, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)
- My feeling is that all Harry Potter stuff should be merged in a single Harry Potter article. --Ann O'nyme 03:05, 30 Aug 2003 (UTC)
- Bad precedent? In what way? The Wikipedia should have information on every area of human knowledge, not just the ones that certain people deem to be worthy. The Harry Potter Lexicon is a well-known website. Whether it is official or not is irrelevant. And the title of the article should be whatever the title of the website is, naturally, although I'm not sure whether the definite article should be included or not. -- Oliver P.
- Harry Potter is too large and complicated a universe to be merged into one article. Shouldn't the fate of these things be decided by people who understand them. I have only ever seen one thing that has to do with Star Trek, but I don't take part in writing and editing Star Trek articles.
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=&url=http://www.hp-lexicon.org
alexa says it's not important enough to warrant an article. See Wikipedia:Alexa test (when I write it!) Martin 10:56, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
[edit] of importance
I think being used by the author herself to research past parts of her work at least constitutes hp-lexicon being noteworthy even as just a stub. I don't think it would be fair to put that on her personal article, or that of the series itself. Having the stub even of an unofficial site allows others to research more about the topic. Maybe giving one article for Harry Potter Fansites would be more fair then there would be less favoritism from the single article for the Lexicon by allowing a look at the larger picture in showing what kind of following the Harry Potter series has made as a Pop-Culture Icon. 71.71.79.235 21:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
