User talk:Neville Longbottom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello Neville Longbottom, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  --HappyCamper 00:14, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Thank you very much for your nice welcome and helpful links. Neville Longbottom 00:32, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
    No problem. I hope you like the place. There are lots of nice people around. See you around the Wiki :-) --HappyCamper 11:33, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
    I would like to welcome you as well. - NathanHP (Talk • Contribs) 05:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
    Thank you very much, Nathan. :-)
    You're welcome. - NathanHP (Talk • Contribs) 07:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RAB

Hi, just to explain my point. The foreign editions have been published 4 months after the english editions. You say that for OOTP the dalay was 5 months, and I am not disagreeing. The point is however, that in each case the foreign editions were delayed compared to the english editions. You have agreed with this. I did not say HBP was delayed more, or less: it seems to have been delayed much the same. This is arguably evidence that nothing is different this time, but not evidence of no delay. I have absolutely no doubt the foreign publishers are very unhappy with this, because every single english book which gets sold in their countries is a loss of profit to them, and an 'off the top' loss, at that. Their costs will be just the same. So I imagine they are all screaming about the delay. Particularly in this situation, where so many of the books are actually sold in the first week, never mind the first month. Logistically, there is no reason for the translations to be delayed, except for the issue of translating them.

I suppose, obviously, there is an extra stage to be gone through in preparing a translation, which must take time. But the American version is also translated from the english version. This is a HUGE moneyspinner, so I doubt very much indeed that the cost of a translator, or as many as are needed -say to prepare a translation within one week- is an issue. So the only issue is the copyright holders, alleged, concern that if they give the book to translators it may be leaked. Perhaps, I suppose they don't care which company's books get sold, so long as someones do. But equally, if they can trust their own staff and printers, I don't see why they can't trust foriegn publishers too. It strikes me as a specious reason. Whereas, given that the foreign editions will inevitably spoil the puzzle of RAB (and the publishers will know that before publication, even if we didn't), they have an extra reason to delay publication of the spoilers.

While we are on the subject, what do you make of the mystery leak of the middle name, two months ago? If it turns out to be correct, then I will draw the conclusion that it was deliberate- to boost interest in the puzzle while it was still a puzzle. Then there is JKRs comment in her publication day interview, that she wanted people to be working out the RAB thing almost immediately. Again, suggesting she might have gone to some pains to ensure people had a bit of time with the puzzle, but wanted to get them working on it before it was solved anyway. Sandpiper 08:39, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

  • I think that the middle name Arcturus was a true information (maybe given by a translator). My personal guess is, that the Lexicon staff thought it was okay to put it on their side, but then either JKR or the person, who gave them the information, begged them to take it down, because it would give to much away. That's why they can't say, why they took it down. If the information were wrong, than I think (or hope) they would have the guts to admit it. I don't agree that it was deliberate to boost interest in the puzzle. Mostly because at this time most fans speculatd about this puzzle anyway. Neville Longbottom 18:28, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I would like to just let you know I responded to your post on the discussion page of Harry Potter.

Also, I would like to give my views on R.A.B. What about Abraxas? Isn't Malfoy's grandfather named Abraxas Malfoy? And the Blacks and Malfoys are all interbred... it would make logical sense that maybe this particular persons middle name was named after a family member.

Seems unlikely to me. There is no Abraxas on the Black family tree. Of course that doesn't rule it out, but I suppose it's likelier that Regulus is named after a closer family nember, like Arcturus and Alphard. It still is my opinion, that the Arcturus rumour was true, but that the Lexicon wasn't supposed to publish it. Especially since they never said, that their information was wrong, which I think they would have done, if this was the reason, why they put it down. But of course that's all specualtion anyway. ;-) And I will now look at the Harry Potter page. Neville Longbottom 10:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citing sources for this

Could you cite your sources for the edit in the title? A page number in one of the books or web link to a statement by Rowling would be sufficient.

Thank you, Lee S. Svoboda tɑk 20:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I saw the source here.

Lee S. Svoboda tɑk 20:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Hungarian Horntail.jpg)

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Hungarian Horntail.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. cholmes75 (chit chat) 15:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regulus not RAB

You posted this on the R.A.B. discussion page : "I agree. I find this section pretty bad as well. To begin with, Sirius' obviously biased opinion about Regulus is stated as if it were fact, which I find very problematic. Also, the fact that the locket found in GP12 isn't described as gold is hardly an argument against the Regulus theory. It still is a heavy locket and therefore fits the description of the one from the Pensieve scenes. The Kreacher argument is IMO pretty weak as well. First of all, fifteen years have passed and Kreacher could have been in better conditions at the time R.A.B. stole the locket. And second, even if not, Regulus could have gotten help from someone else. His accomplice doesn't have to be Kreacher. Neville Longbottom 13:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)" Question: where is there any reference to Regulus' 'obviously biased opinion about Regulus'? (there is a comment that any second-hand info is likely to be flawed, however). As for the Kreacher argument, this is based upon the fact that, according to Dumbledore, the boat only allows one 'of age' wizard (Harry was underage, and therefore not registered): unless Regulus took a kid with him (requiring the production of a superfluous second miscreant in the Horcrux Heist), or was a kid himself and took an adult (but since he would have come of age in his sixth year, and he must have died a few months after leaving school, this confuses the remark about soon being dead), it must have been only him. Unless he took Kreacher, who not only would be unrecognised by the boat, but would be capable of apparating directly in and out of the cave. As for the argument that Kreacher could have been better at the time: well, he could have been (indeed the general argument is that he was until he drank the potion), but he certainly hasn't been since the death of Mrs Black (Sirius claimed the house hadn't been cleaned in ten years: very odd, given that Arcturus Black had been dead only four years aat the time of OotP), and there have been no comments regarding Kreachers changed mental state. As for the locket: the point remains that it was not referred to as a) being gold and b) having an S on the front. So even if Regulus was R.A.B., the Horcrux *may* be unaccounted for, even if the Trio find the Black Locket during 'Harry Potter and the Trip to the Landfill Site'. As you may or may not have guessed, I do believe that Regulus is R.A.B., and the Locket is probably the Horcrux. But the devil is in the details... Michaelsanders 13:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

About Sirius: Sirius didn't get along with his family. It is nearly impossible for him to be completely neutral about anything involving the Black family (except maybe Andromeda), just as it would be nearly impossible for any member of the family to be neutral about him. Sirius' judgement just has to be clouded by his personal experiences with said family members. Not to mention that he left the family when he was around 15. Given that Regulus was even younger, Sirius probably had the last time any close contact with him (since I don't think they hang out with each other in Hogwarts), when Regulus was about 13, and as good as a child. If we include Sirius time in Hogwarts, he probably saw his brother for the last time when Regulus was 15. Still very young. I therefore do not think Sirius is a particularly good judge on a 20 years old Regulus' character. Not to mention that the secret keeper disaster could make you doubt Sirius' abilities to judge other people in general. I do see your points about Kreacher and the locket, however. Neville Longbottom 15:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I see what you mean, but we cannot go the other way and assume that anything that Sirius was automatically *wrong* about anything. We have no real way of knowing that Regulus was not everything Sirius said him to be (and assuming that Sirius was wrong leads us to wonder if Mr Black at least was a wonderful man who hated Voldemort, and if Uncle Alphard was as bad as his sister - Mrs Black's portrait, on the other hand seems a testament to the accuracy of Sirius' impressions). We do not know how well the brothers really knew each other, or how fully they could have got each others measure, and until we have further confirmation we are left in this 'maybe/maybe not' situation. As for the Fidelius Debacle, there's too much wrong with that set-up: it stinks of plot device necessary to set up Harry's future (why didn't they use Dumbledore as caster and Keeper?!). The element of mistrust within the group just seems a device to explain how it all happened. Michaelsanders 19:34, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Harry Potter

Hello, Neville Longbottom. Over at WikiProject Harry Potter we're trying to compile a list of active participants. Your name, along with all other project participants, has been placed on the inactive list. If you'd like to get involved again, please place your name back on the active list, and take a look at the project talk page for the latest happenings.

RHB(AWB) 23:16, 30 December 2006 (UTC), on behalf of WPHarry Potter

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dolores Umbridge.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dolores Umbridge.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Slowking Man 00:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!

Hello Neville Longbottom! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Image:Signature icon.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c
 21:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Things to do
Miscellaneous
    • That's nice. But I'm not that new. I just took a break. I'm a bit surprised that my previous discussions have gone, but oh well. I did edit several pages (among them several about Harry Potter) regularly during the first half of 2006. But thanks anyway. ;-) Neville Longbottom 23:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your userpage and talk page

It looks like your pages were deleted on accident [1] because Pathoschild (talk • contribs) thought you were a blocked user. I'd suggest contacting him/her about restoring them (it's an easy process). John Reaves (talk) 23:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I wanted to ask you, if you could restore my user page, please. If I understood correctly, you mistakingly thought I was a blocked user. But I'm not and never was. It would be nice, if I could get my old page back. Thanks in advance. Neville Longbottom 23:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello Neville Longbottom. I noticed the same thing a few days ago and contacted the user who placed {{indefblockeduser}} on your user page about it. I've restored your pages; I apologize for any inconvenience this mistake may have caused. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 00:30:04, 01 March 2007 (UTC)
No problem. Neville Longbottom 15:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../n/e/v/User_talk%7ENeville_Longbottom_e459.html"