Talk:R.A.B./Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Talk archives for R.A.B. (current talk page)
<< 1 < Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 > 3 >>

Contents

Foreign edition deadline

I was struck by the comment about initials and foreign translations. It seems pretty certain that the regulus black debate is going to be solved by comparing foreign translations where the characters have translated names. If this is so, then JKR must have known before the book was published that the RAB riddle would only have about 4 months life before it was solved conclusively. Hence her desire to see it discussed now, while there is doubt. Which would explain something else I read, that foreign translators were not allowed to see HBP and prepare translations before the english version was published. That struck me as a bit odd at the time, that they could not trust their staff enough to work on the book in secret. But if they had a pressing need to not publish in foreign languages for a while to preserve the riddle? Then they would need an excuse to delay foreign publication????? Sandpiper 00:11, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

OR we are going to wait and see what happens instead of speculating, since we are working on an encyclopedia, not on a forum. --Sn0wflake 02:14, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
well, we might take the view that we will refuse to point out relevant facts from the texts in order not to spoil the puzzle, but that is not encyclopedic either. Wiki policy wikipedia:No original research says
'research that consists of collecting and organizing information from existing primary and/or secondary sources is strongly encouraged'. So I think we should.
But I think you will find that everyone here, including those who feel we should show restraint in reporting this stuff, are here because they personally are interested in all available information. Sandpiper 19:17, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
Discussing "excuses to delay foreign publication" and what J. K. Rowling thinks or not is not encyclopedic. Adding a terse comment to the article on how the R.A.B. situation might be solved when the editions of HBP in certain languages are released is a different matter. I insist that it would be much more logical to wait for said books to be published instead of adding yet more speculation to the article, though. --Sn0wflake 20:04, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
Well, actually I wasn't planning to, and I do not think I said that I had any plan to. I don't think there is even a remote reference in the books to real world events, or anything which might support speculation on the publishers motives. I posted it here to see whether anyone had a view on it. I am not yet totally convinced, but I think it will be interesting to see how the editions differ. I thought it quite amusing. Also relevant to us in compiling the page in that the tussle over what else might justifiably be included could possibly be resolved much more quickly than having to wait for book seven. Sorry if I panicked you. Sandpiper 22:11, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Amy Benson, Burkes, and miscellaneous

Recently I made some changes to the article with a full edit summary, including removing candidates that were original research and did not even have initials of R.A.B, or even R.B. I also made other changes that were described. Sandpiper reverted many of my changes while only saying "What's wrong with Amy Benson." Therefore, I am restoring all other changes while keeping Amy Benson in the article temporarily. I am only allowing the Benson info to stay one week without a source. After that, I will assume it is original research and it will be removed. I ask all editors to please cooperate. This is Wikipedia policy. If anyone has any other issues with my edit beyond the Amy Benson protest in the Sandpiper revert, they should describe them here. Do not revert without explanation. Superm401 | Talk 00:17, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Also, Sandpiper added a discussion forum back in with a misleading edit summary stating only that J.K.R endorses mugglenet and The Leaky Cauldron. He did not explain why the forum should be there, and I already explained that it should be removed because the participants are non-notable. If you have a specific reason to add the forum link again, explain it here. Otherwise, please do not. Superm401 | Talk 00:21, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
Specifically, when I say I am restoring other changes, here is what I am doing in that edit.
  1. Remove link from horcrux, because otherwise "emphasis added" note needed.
  2. The trio do not investigate the R.A.B mystery, so remove note stating otherwise.
  3. Remove subjective OR about "no better fit" and lack of clues because searching for clues and determining what is best fit are OR
  4. Remove note about Kreacher's craziness, which is pure OR
  5. Remove Borgin, Burkes because there is no proof of R or A, making them blatant speculation and OR.
  6. Possibly very minor changes elsewhere.
--Superm401 | Talk 00:30, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
Maybe you didn't read all of the comments in the discussion links on the bottom of the article, and i can't blame you for that, but how can you remove stuff for being OR if you didn't even read the sources?
Besides, leaving Amy Benson in but not Borgin makes no sense whatsoever. Quit replacing other theories by your own, this is an encyclopedia not your own HP fan site. Removing a character solely based on the reason that his first name is not known yet is not a very good reason you know.
That you speak of removing Burke already shows that you do not know where you are talking about, for we already know Burkes first name, Caracactus, so we know he cannot be RAB, and was therefor not listed as a possibility in the piece you have removed. --62.251.90.73 10:06, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
I did not keep Amy Benson in because I think she's RAB(IMHO, given her name (NO R) and the fact that she's a muggle, that's completely ridiculous speculation). I kept it in because she was the only character contested in the edit summary. See my comments at bottom of the page. Superm401 | Talk 01:39, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

The current revision appears to be reasonable. Would it be too much for both parties to live with it? --Sn0wflake 02:11, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi superman. Please read the rather long sections I wrote above in discussion with deathphoenix. The theories about who is RAB are not original research in the meaning ascribed by wiki. I am a lot more determined on this point than on the issue of whether they merit inclusion. I can see why people may argue they are not worthy of inclusion (though I do not agree) but they are certainly not 'original research'. They are widely held and discussed views. The links removed to 'mugglenet' and 'leaky cauldron' show hundreds, possibly thousands of people discussing and supporting them. So, running this argument slightly backwards, please do not delete references. By all means include better references instead, but otherwise leave them. You may feel that wiki is the only and best source of information on this subject on the internet, but others may not. Even if you do not feel they are directly relevant to a particular point they should be included as per wiki policy as sources of further general information.

  1. re horcrux, dont quite understand what you meant, but I am not arguing.
  2. re Investigation, read the book. Yes they do. Hermione in fact produces two candidates with the correct initials. I do not remember their names (they may be above somewhere, rufus axebanger something?). This is fact from book.
  3. I inserted no better fit etc from an internet discussion, so again it is not original research. The difficulty with this section is to try to balance it. The way you have left it is too definitive that Regulus is not R.A.B. In the interests of accuracy the article should certainly give the impression that he is widely believed to be RAB, and that there are frankly no other good candidates. This is what you yourself have said when arguing for deleting the rest of the names mentioned. So it seems your position is that the case for RAB being regulus has been largely proved, despite your wanting to write the article claiming it is very uncertain. This seems to be misleading the readers.
  4. Kreachers craziness is nothing to do with me, but again I have seen this suggested more than once so I myself did not strike it out.
  5. The issue of initials seem to be being overplayed. I think (to do some original research) that JKR has quite deliberately given us no RABs precisely. It would have taken about 2 paragraphs at the end of the book for harry to ask someone at the funeral what regulus' middle name was, but this did not happen. We are expected (to stop doing original research) to speculate about people who have nearly the correct initials,and this is all part of the puzzle which has been widely discussed, and we should be properly explaining to readers. It is entirely appropriate and within wiki guidelines to say that a puzzle has been set to find characters within the book with certain initials, and then to list those who fit, or might allowing for the usual conventions of people using a second name or getting married. That is not original research, it is merely indexing references within the text. Thus I have yet to see anyone state a reference which says Amy benson can not fit. On the other hand, amelia bones other name was susan,so I would not regard her as a likely candidate, but still worthy of inclusion to bring together the separate facts that she is normally referred to as amelia, but there is a reference to her other name being susan. we aim to report relevant facts here.

But apologies if you felt I was a little high-handed in altering your changes. It is not possible to include all this in the edit summary. And frankly, i felt there was a lot which had been removed which should be restored.81.139.132.104 15:43, 24 August 2005 (UTC)(User:Sandpiper, not logged in)

Madam Rosmerta Theory

We know little of the past of Madam Rosmerta, nor do we know her full name. She could be a current or former member any organization (The Order of the Phoenix, a Death Eater, etc.) or none, as all are secretive. Weakness to the imperius curse should not rule her out. It would also be in Rowling's style to pull an obscure, rather nonessential character into the main plot and unexpected powers, abilities or intelligence. It is also possible that Madam Rosmerta could have put together things she has heard in the Three Broomsticks, such as the depositing of hundreds of bodies in the cave by deatheaters, a Good task to be delegated by Voldemort.

Though why she did not pass the information on to Dumbledore would be a mystery, and Rowling would have a good explanation for it, maybe a basis of fear, mistrust, phsychological blocking of the horror, alterior motives, etc.

Male or female R.A.B-translation

Russian and middle-eastern languages will translate R.A.B.'s letter differently if R.A.B is female. Did the translators ask JKR whether R.A.B. is male or female?

I await with interest the cross-refencing which will ensue in a few months.Sandpiper 17:48, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

I can see the (Harry Potter fandom) headlines now: Russian translation proves that Amelia Bones is R.A.B. --Deathphoenix 18:44, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm surprised nobody has suggested that it's Susan Bones. ;-) -- DocSigma 11:58, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Resolution

I was wrong. I will admit that. It is a bad idea to allow any kind of theory unsupported by Rowling to enter this article, since it creates a "my theory is no worse than the next" scenario, despite the fact that some theories are quite clearly more plausible than others. Thus, I will try to solve this in a manner that all agree, but if I fail, I will use the shotgun approach. It's the only fair thing to do. What I intend to do at the moment: making an edit which will include only verified information concerning Regulus and omitting the rest of the article, making a terse list of "other possible candidates" with a one-line explanation of why they could be R.A.B. In case people start expanding or reverting, I will protect the article and end of story. Does anybody disagree very much with this? Or can we accept it as a fair solution for all, at least for the moment? --Sn0wflake 01:45, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

That would be very wrong, there isn't any more 'verified information' of regulus being RAB then of the other possibilities. There is only fan theory and speculation. While the regulus theory is (imo) a more likely then the other ones, it's still all speculation, and puting in only one possibility while ommitting all others isn't the way wiki works. Especially since we can assume it was the intention of JK for the readers to speculate about who might be R.A.B., in that case puting in only one theory is simply wrong, even though it's the most likely.
I think the article is pretty good now as it is, the blatent speculation is left out, only the facts from the books that could be clues to support one of the theories is still in.--62.251.90.73 11:10, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Regulus is the only character on which Rowling has commented on interviews. No speculation regarding him will be included, just the quote from the interview and why it could be. The "way the wiki works" is the way which is fair to everyone. --Sn0wflake 21:58, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Reasons why it could be = speculation. With the other possibilities mentioned in this article it only gives facts from the book that could be clues for the person being R.A.B. aswell. If you would only quote the interview piece and nothing else about regulus THEN it would be fair, yes. But since R.A.B. is intended by JKR to be speculated about, it would be weird not to mention the major theories about it. That's why I argue to keep the article very much as it is. Which is also fair. --62.251.90.73 09:37, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
Reason why it could be='collecting and organising information from existing sources', which is recommended to all wiki editors. Editors are expected to include facts quoted from recognised sources, or arguments widely held in the community at large. The difficulty is to avoid creating theories of your own, or of referring to theories which have little actual support. However, this is all the same issue and it is not clear to me how you can provide information about Regulus without providing information on others. Snowflake is quite correct that I have not anywhere seen anything which merits much more than a sentence stating the facts about anyone apart from Regulus. But I do feel it is worth trying to preserve the feel of this article as an unsolved puzzle, which for balance ought to mean including other possibilitiesSandpiper 18:09, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
If it wouldn't be speculation we would already be 100% sure that Regulus is R.A.B., and we wouldn't be having this discussion at all. For the rest your reply seems to be an accusation of OR, and apparantly you haven't read any of this articles' sources, or you would have seen the editorial on one of the biggest HP sites out there with over 350 replies discussing wether or not Borgin could be R.A.B., aswell as you would have noticed that any long discussion about the R.A.B. mystery has people suggesting about Borgin as a possibility. Google it if you don't believe me. I suggest you do some research on the subject yourself next time you're commenting. I really fail to understand how you can accuse people of OR if you don't even bother reading the sources. --62.251.90.73 18:43, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm not suggesting removing Borgin, or anyone else you care to mention with a simple straightforward explanation of how (by mentioning facts from the books), they are candidates. What i really mean, is that Regulus is favourite candidate because there are quite a lot of references about him which fit, but relatively few about anyone else. Which logically means he would get more of a mention here than anyone else, because there is more to say. You might invent a theory that it was Dumbledore, but he wanted to test harry and see how he would react when Dumbledore got sick etc. I expect some one has thought of that somewhere. But there is really nothing to support such a theory from the books themselves so it would be pretty pointless to mention it. I don't accuse people of original research. I worry about whether something reported is noteable and accurate. Sandpiper 19:30, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
But noone here was argueing that every theory should have an equal amount of space. So if that was what you ment, then what point did you try to make?
Editors are expected to include facts quoted from recognised sources, or arguments widely held in the community at large. The difficulty is to avoid creating theories of your own, or of referring to theories which have little actual support. Sounds like an accusation of OR.--62.251.90.73 19:40, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
No, but many people think so. I was semi-quoting from the wiki policy which explicitly states what is not 'original research'. The problem, at root, is that it is literally impossible to create any article without at some level doing 'original research'. You are expected to research what you write, draw together related facts. But, on the other hand, you are not permitted just to make it all up. Sandpiper 21:09, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Arcturus

Does anyone know whether the inserted quote that hp-lexicon was claiming RAB was 'arcturus' was an actual page they put up then removed, or a total spoof by an anon?Sandpiper 18:12, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Yup, I saw it, it was there, on the Regulus Black page that was linked to as a source in this article. I read it after that dude put it in the article, it was reported on mugglenet.com aswell, it said that a 'reliable source' confirmed that Regulus is R.A.B. and that his second name would be Arcturus. The entire page was written as it was already 100% sure that Regulus was R.A.B. including explanations of the meaning of his middle name and all that. [1]
Also I'm wondering why you removed everything about this without apparantly having a clue about what is going on. I think it's total disrespect for the other users to revert user edits without knowing anything about the subject you are reverting on yourself. Especially when proper sources were cited. Anonymous contributors are wikipedians aswell, and if you don't like that go found your own encyclopedia. --62.251.90.73 18:22, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
I checked the hp-lexicon page given as reference, before I removed it. It makes no mention of 'arcturus'. So either it was never there, or they have withdrawn it. If you have proof that it was there, then you can include it as an amusing incident which came and went. But the fact that it is not there now rather suggests they are not standing by the story now, so we can hardly do so either. More information would be needed about what happened, before it could be included. Did someone break in and post a false page there? 62.41.130.198 19:14, 1 September 2005 (UTC)(user:Sandpiper, computer has decided not to log on again)
Maybe someone higher up the lexicons' ranks didn't want to spoil too much, so it could still be relevant. But you can remove it from the article again if you don't agree. I don't care much about it. I was just annoyed by your reverting without knowing anything about it. --62.251.90.73 19:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
well indeed, I find it fascinating, there could be good reason for it being there, and good reasons (including legal/contractual ones) why it might have been withdrawn despite being accurate. But it could also be a total hoax. I have yet to see it on an actual internet page? Sandpiper 20:56, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
Earlier in this discussion i linked mugglenet.com [2] which reports the lexicon claim. (i guess you missed that) Googling[3] also gives reports of it happening. And most interesting: it quotes cached parts of lexicon pages with the name "Regulus Arcturus Black" on it. [4] --62.251.90.73 21:30, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for posting the link again. I have had a look (and elsewhere), and it certainly appears that hp-lexicon did post this story, and would not have done so without a good source. However, they have also removed it, leaving only the comment that the news has been particluarly interesting lately. Though, they were still listing Regulus arcturus black as a member of the death eaters. If they had good grounds to now disbelieve it, I would have thought they would have explained what happened. So maybe there is more information to come...or they got a solicitors letter? If the story were wholly incorrect, I don't see why anyone would be arguing legalities, just laughing privately.So...Sandpiper 23:30, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it's very curious, had it been a hacker or a staff member go nuts or something, then they would have told it openly i think. So i think it's either that the story is true and a lawyer demanded it to dissappear, or the other possibility that the story is true and someone at the lexicon felt remorse about spoiling it (maybe the head admin as opposed to the woman that posted the news). Do you think we should put something about it in this wiki article? --62.251.90.73 00:15, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I'd put a link to the mugglenet site, at http://www.mugglenet.com/newsfusion/fullnews.php?id=1116 and the Google search that quotes the page, at http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Regulus+Arcturus+Black . To confirm it further, we can put a link to a leaky cauldron news story, at http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/MTarchives/007504.php . That is cached by google at http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:XG6TXUKuPGcJ:www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/MTarchives/007504.php+&hl=en , in case the real page is taken down. By the way, I'm now okay with leaving the speculation about Amy Benson and Borgin in, as long as they have sources. I still don't believe the theories are notable, but I can tolerate them with references. Borgin has one(though it was temporarily down), but Benson does not have a specific source. Can someone please provide one? Superm401 | Talk 01:51, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Does anyone see a pattern here? book published July. Mysterious suggestion that Black's middle name is Arcturus in September to stir up the debate, confirmation of sorts from the foreign editions in November. Someone playing games with her public? Sandpiper 21:37, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

RAB as Pictogram

There are three pictures in RAB turned upside down. The Three houses. Hufflepuff is the first picture, Ravenclaw is the second picture and Slytheryn is the last picture. "B" makes up the picture of a badger when it is turned upside down Bones' last initial "B". "A" makes up the picture of the eagle when it is turned upside down. Last name that starts with an "A" is still being investigated. "R" makes up the picture of the snake when it is turned upside down. Last name that starts with an "R" is still being investigated. My theory is that it is three people. Bones being one of them.--66.87.127.175 15:48, 14 September 2005 (UTC)September 14, 2005

...what? o_0 -- DocSigma 18:49, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
R.A.B. refers to him/herself several times as "I" during the note found inside the fake locket.--207.160.210.253 01:44, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying. But I'm saying that only "1" person wrote the note. There are two more people who helped get the horocrux. The initials stand for three last names. Because if you turn the book upside down at look at RAB upside down you will see three pictures of the three houses. The first being a badger side profile-Hufflepuff, the second a bird looking directly at you - Ravenclaw and lastly the snake coiled around a stick - Slytheryn. These pictures are not a fluke and I believe because of this evidence, that it was three people from three houses. Also they would have to know exceptional magic to get to the horcruxes. Regulas Black was too young to know that type of magic (such as Harry needs help getting to the Horocruxes and DD is his help). So I determined that the three must be older. And I believe one of them to be Amelia Bones. The "B" in her last name makes up the "B" part of RAB and turned upside down the B makes up the picture of the badger - Hufflepuff. Of which this was her house when she was in school as is her neice Susan Bones.

Not a person?

Why is everyone asuming that RAB is an i identification of the note's auther? the letters could just as easily be a hidden mesage. In "the secret garden" one charecter signs his notes BAR, standing for Burn After Reading. The leters RAB could stand for Read And Burn, or any number of other phrases.

I doubt it's a person as well. It might be an organization, or as you say, a message. JK likes tricking us. Remember when (SPOILERS, of course) we thought that that Snape and Sirius were bad guys in books 1 & 3. Remember when we thought that there was a super-weapon in book 5? Remember when we were looking for a royal prince in book 6. The fact that Ron and Hermone thought that RAB were initials shows us that they aren't. -Arctic.gnome 08:45, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Spoiler, Dumbledore's Death

This article starts by mentioning Dumbledore's death. While it is hard to see how anyone could have read the book far enough to know about RAB without going on and discovering the death, why do we begin by saying Dumbledore is dead? This is entirely irrelevant information to the issue of who RAB might be. Sandpiper 23:01, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Because if Dumbledore hadn't been thrown from the battlements, Harry would not have thought to look in his robes for the fake Horcrux. The note was in the Horcrux, signed by R.A.B. so if Dumbledore hadn't died (unlikely) then i assume the RAB message would not be needed. -Kordos If Dumbledore hadn't died, then presumably he and harry would have opened the locket and discussed who might have written it. (though, of course, Dumbledore would almost certainly have known what Regulus Blacks full name was, and certainly should have thought of him. So perhaps he had to die so we might enjoy the puzzle?)

RAB is Dumbledore

Could it be possible that RAB is Dumbledore? R could be an unknown first-name or possibly the word "respectfully," A for Albus, and B could be two Ds stacked up on each other (a fancy way of signing his name). -Feripe

What theories should be listed here? It looks like only the most popular candidates show up here. But why are the most popular the only ones that should be mentioned? - Mig

well, to be listed a theory would have to have a degree of noteability, a significant body of support. It would also have to pass a common sense test of whether it was factually acurate.
In the example here, we are somewhere told Dumbledore's whole name, and it does not fit the initials at all. Second, the fact of signing the note with anything suggests that this will be meaningfull to the person reading the note, so it is not likely to be difficult to identify. Perhaps if Dumbledore was in the habit of signing hinself with a monogram, but he is not. The simplest and most obvious explanation is that it is exactly what it appears to be, three initials of someones name. That is how it is interpreted within the book. Sandpiper 19:09, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
Haven't gotten a wiki account yet, but I probably will momentarily. Anyway, Dumbledore's full name is Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore. Plus, comparing what has been given as Dumbledore's writing before (Sorcerer's Stone, note that falls out of Invisibility Cloak) with R.A.B's handwriting, I don't see much of a resemblance. So I don't think R.A.B is Dumbledore. Interesting theory though. 69.92.180.201 07:17, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

R is Really A is Albus and the B is 2 D's for Dumbledore

Borgin

I think RAB is Mr. Borgin from Borgin and Burkes. Borgin's first name is never revealed to us in the books. Tom Riddle worked for Mr. Borgin when he was young and stole some of Borin's treasures. What sweet revenge it would be to steal his horcrux's.

Information available to foreign translatore

It has been suggested on the main page that foreign translators have not been told how to vary character names. Now, I have seen debate on this point in discussions elsewhere, and argument about exactly what translators meant when they claimed not to have advance knowledge. However, it was still claimed that JKR had vetted changes to the books, and it beggars believe that she would allow a translation where the initials were frankly wrong. This would lead to foreign editions containing entirely different storylines in the next books! Sandpiper 10:08, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

This is a bit of a contentious issue. If it's known that Rowling okayed the translations, initials included, we can probably cut out half of this article (Borgin, Burkes, Benson, and Bones)! Maybe this should be the next question for Rowling: whether the translators provided "official" translations of the R.A.B. initials. IMO, this is such an important plot element that it's unlikely Rowling would overlook it. In the meantime, we should probably keep looking for any notes on whether the R.A.B. translations are official. --Deathphoenix 16:28, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
The information about the translation of R.A.B. into R.A.S. in the norwegian translation I got directly from the norwegian translator. Being asked the question "Do you know who R.A.B. is, or is your translation just a guess, like everybody else?", he answered (taken from my memory, so it's not word for word, and some (unimportant) details might be wrong) "Well, I've never been given explicit information about the identity, but I work with about twelve other translators, and one of these [he did not state who] has discussed this a lot with, well not Rowling directly, but her agent [I believe it was the agent, at least] and information have surfaced that makes me quite sure I have gotten it right. But it's still a guess." This information was given after a speak he gave about reading books in the original language compared to reading (good) translations, given last saturday at Studentersamfundet, Trondheim, Norway. It leads me to believe that a) yes, the information is correct and b) that Rowling has not OKed the translations as official. Tutorp
I would not interpret what you have said in that way. Yes, I agree that she has not yet made a definitive statement, but assuming this information is correct, it says that someone had clear information from an agent of JKR, which was passed to other translators. The information does not make a cast-iron case that it is Black: for example, it now makes his mother a much more likely candidate, since she still has the correct initial for her last name and unknown first ones. There remains doubt, but some of the other most possible candidates have been further sidelined. The puzzle is much narrower in the translated books, but they have not whittled it down absolutely to one person. I don't imagine JKR will say anything definitve just for this reason. There are two issues: whether the translated books have been OKed as consistent with what will follow, and whether it is absolutely certain it is BlackSandpiper 16:58, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
From what Tutorp says, it seems that the Norwegian translator, who likely knows more than us about the books, have come to the conclusion that it is Regulus Black (or at least, a member of the Black family), based on information given by what he thinks is Rowling's agent. It also seems that Rowling hasn't directly talked to the translator about this. Therefore, the translator, who is in contact with someone "on the inside" believes it is Regulus Black, but unfortunately, doesn't know for sure. Since we don't know for sure, I guess Amy Benson, Amanda Bones, and the other folks have to stay (even though I disagree with their addition in the first place ;-) ). I bet Rowling had the agents talk to the translators instead of doing it herself on purpose, just to leave this tiny bit of uncertainty. --Deathphoenix 18:27, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


This is from SLYTHER RAB is Dumbledore? Impossible! WHy on earth would DUmbledore leave this note and then return once more, risking his life? WHat does does taht do to him or Harry? This theory is too imaginative!

Ignatius: This translation business has now satisfied my growing certainty that R. A. B. is Regulus Black. It does all point to him. I humbly suggest that the Dark Lord took somebody all when he was installing the horcrux/locket to watch his back, whatever - the magic which he was doing at the time probably required his full attention. He probably chose Regulus because he was fairly insignificant. Regulus would have seen what was going on; he then, at some point, turned against Voldemort, gone on the run, "done" the Horcrux then before Voldemort had him killed - thereby keeping up the charade that Regulus was unimportant.

dlh: The article on RAB says that translations into other languages are done by people other than JKR herself. Does this also apply to French? We know she is fluent in French (she taught it for some time), and she got at least one character name (Voldemort) from the French. Does JKR write the French translations herself? If so, has anyone paid special attention to what information can be obtained from them?

R.A.B. is Regulus Black

Hello, I'm Dutch and in my Dutch copy of the Halfblood Prince the letter to Voldemort is signed by R.A.Z. (Regulus A. Zwarts)--84.26.109.69

Thanks for the confirmation. :-) Out of curiosity, are there ANY wizards who could match those initials, any who has a Dutch surname starting with the letter "Z" (including those who don't start with the letter "B" in English)? Thanks, Deathphoenix 18:32, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
It's an almost impossible task to check all the possible R.A.Z. translations but on the other hand I don't have to, because we know the following things:
  • The author of the letter is probably a Death Eater for he addresses Voldemort with Dark Lord and as far as the books reveal only (presumed) Death Eaters do this. Harry and the Order address him with Voldemort (Harry and Order members who don't fear Voldemort), You-Know-Who or He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.
  • In the Dutch edition the only Death Eater with the initials R.A.Z. is Regulus Black. --84.26.109.69
But does anyone else have a last name beginning with Z? Sandpiper 01:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Rowling has confirmed that R.A.B. is Regulus Black (preceeding unsigned comment was by 82.6.169.187 at 09:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC))

Oh really - that is wonderful to know! But, as Lucius Malfoy would say ... Why don't you PROVE IT! And do NOT attempt to merge the R.A.B article with the Regulus Black article again until you do. Thanks. --T-dot 11:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Someone ought to mention the fact that HP-Lexicon posted in late August/ early September of 2005 that a reliable source confirmed that R.A.B. meant "Regulus Arcturus Black," and after that, this post was taken down at the publishers' request. I am trying to find a citation for this. I am pretty sure that it was discussed on a joint PotterCast/MuggleCast episode where Melissa Anelli said that she "had a good idea" who had given the information. The only reference I can currently find is in the News section of MuggleCast Episode 5. --Phi*n!x 03:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I found the MuggleCast discussion. It wasn't a "Leaky Mug" episode; it was just members of PotterCast appearing on MuggleCast. It was MuggleCast Episode 7, section: "Voicemail: RAB Confirmed?" I think that this merits addition to the article, which I will make ASAP. –Phi*n!x 03:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Just a comment, but as far as referring to Voldemort as "Dark Lord" and not "You Know Who"... if you think are going to die (possibly by him) and you are speaking indirectly to Voldemort, are you really going to call him "You-Know-Who"? You're either very brave or resigned to death. Either way, just because RAB referred to him as Dark Lord you can't automatically assume he was a Death Eater. Just as possible, it was sarcasm. -Krawnight 19:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

R.A.B. has to be at least two people.

Forgive me if someone has already mentioned this and I just missed it, but it occurs to me that R.A.B. would 1) have to consist of at least two people, and that 2) Regulus Black is far to obvious. Here's what I mean: 1) Dumbledore, one of the greatest wizards in the history of the world, needed help from a boy still at school to drink the potion to find the locket. Harry had to force the potion down his throat, and there was no way that Dumbledore would have been able to fill the cup up with water by himself. If Dumbledore couldn't do it alone I have serious doubts that Regulus Black, even from the little information that we have about him, would have been capable all by himself. 2) As has already been pointed out, Rowling has used misdirection on a number of occasions, (Quirrell jinxing Harry during the Quidditch match in the first book while Snape tries to save him, etc.) So leaving us hanging and at the same time dangling Regulus in front of us is the same thing, just in a much more suspenseful way. Sure, Regulus might have been involved, seeing as how he was a reformed Death Eater, but why would Regulus + some other unknown person use just Regulus' initials on the note? I think that in the end it will turn out that it is a mere coincidence, although a planned one by the author to be sure, that Regulus' initials show up on the note. (On a side note, I don't think that we've gotten any kind of evidence that Regulus' middle initial is in fact A.) In any case, and since Wikipedia is not a chat room, I'll try to look around to see if any sources came up with this as well. --Easter Monkey 01:41, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree on the fact that Regulus might have had an accomplice. Still I think Regulus was the leader of this 'heist'. Perhaps he wanted to keep the identity of his helper secret (could be another reformed Death Eater, for example Snape) and did he take sole responsibility for his rash act of bravery. --84.26.109.69
the generally held view is that regulus would have taken the family house-elf kreacher to help. I'm not sure whether Dumbledore needed Harry, I fancy he promised to take him along next time he went after a horcrux, though i could be mistaken. It has been argued that the whole thing was supposed to be some kind of lesson for harry. Any wizard could have reached the island without help. The fact that the potion makes you thirsty, so that you have to drink from the lake and set the beasties on you, rather suggests that whoever put the potion there anticipated that someone might manage to drink it. Sandpiper 01:46, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

If I may refute some points though...

  1. The note is entirely in the singular. The word "We" is never used, but always "I."
  2. There may have been other ways to empty the basin, such as into another basin. or is it not possible that the other person may have been brought along unwillingly, maybe a Deatheater that could have been killed in the process?
  3. Dumbledore is wiser and tricky. It is entirely possible that he was looking for a way to fake his own demise, whether he knew what was in the cave or not. Either way, he knew it would be gaurded with dark Magic.—BC
Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.
  • Erm, BC. If Regulus had an accomplice he's not exactely going to risk allowing Voldermort to know that is he? I mean, if Voldemort knew then fair eough. But if he didn't saying "we" in the letter would just get Voldemort looking around, killing more people and being even more feared. In my opinion, seeing as Harry is related to Draco Malfoy (:-O) (see the Black family tree) and thus James Potter is related to Regulus Black, i take it that it was James that assisted Regulus in surviving the island. Jasca Ducato 11:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Spoilers end here.
I presume, then, that Malfoy will be helping Harry fully in the Horcrux hunt, since *they* are related? It's hardly a logical position to take, to claim that since James and Regulus are related, they would naturally help each other out - especially since we have no reason to believe that RB and JP ever spoke to one another. Sirius would be a far more obvious - albeit wrong - choice of accomplice. And Kreacher even more so: loyal, bound by his contract to be silent and obedient (thus could be constrained by loyalty to drink the potion himself), and insignificant. After all, RAB probably wouldn't even consider mentioning an insignificant house-elf. Michaelsanders 12:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Translation of the R.A.B.-article on wikipedia.org

Hello, this article about R.A.B. is very good and I liked it so much, that I translated it into german for our german fellows in the harry potter forum. But unfortunately the people of wikipedia in Germany find Harry Potter very irelevant and deleted the article. This is disgusting even if it is typical for germans. I thought wikipedia is a very good thing but I am sorry to say this englisch version is very tolerant and nice to read, but the german version is intolerant and so much censored that it's no more fun, it's really sad.

Thanks anyway for the article, it's fantastic :)

Noa


Hi Everyone, TRIWIZARD here. R.A.B. is SNAPE. Yes, you heard me right. Harry and Dumbledore were the ONLY ones in the cave. The first to get the REAL horcrux. No one came before them because the potion was still intact. They retrieved the real horcrux. Dumbledore was slowly dying because he drank the potion. Snape knew this and Dumbledore knew this. The last time when DD destroyed the ring horcrux Snape saved his life by stopping the spread of the curse to only DD's hand. The two of them argued in the forest. Snape was telling DD that he didn't want to be a double agent anymore. He didn't want the responsibility that he might not be able to save DD life again if he went looking for another horcrux. But DD told Snape that he promised and that he had to continue. Snape hit DD with a curse that sent his body flying up into the air. That is a strange type of killing curse as we know the Avada Kadavara curse kills you right then and there. Your body dosen't fly up and slowly fall back to earth. There was a black huddled mass at the body of Dumbledore at the Astronomy Tower. It was Snape who had a head start on Harry he got to DD body and did the switch with the fake locket. I believe that R.A.B. is a code name that Snape uses with Voldemort. It is a name that only LV would know. It is what Snape used to pass information to LV when he was spying on Dumbledore. LV knows this RAB and RAB's letter is written to the Dark Lord. RAB wants revenge. Snapes revenge will be when he destroys the locket horcrux and Snape knows that each horcrux has a killing curse attached to it. Thus he will be killed by destroying the locket. Harry will somehow get the fake to LV and LV thinking that he still has the Locket horcrux will be SHOCKED to learn that it was his trusted servant Snape who helped in his downfall.

Interesting theory.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 07:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


TRIWIZARD here again! Can I get any feed back from anyone on this info I've posted. Does anyone think the same as I?

Yes, I thought really the same thing, that Dumbledore had really taken the real horcrux and after he has fallen down the tower Snape went there and changed the horcrux with the fake. But there are problems I had with it then. When Harry went after Snape, Draco was also with him, because Snape shouted to Draco that he should run and then Snape stopped Harry. Where has Draco been when Snape got the real horcrux and why should he give the fake locket to dumbledores corpse? He could have only taken the locket and fly with it.

What do you think about Dumbledore have had a fake locket with him with the note in it and he forgot to put it in the basin after he took the real one so now the real one is toomed with dumbledore and Harry only found the fake one? Noa


ź===RAB is Binns=== Could RAB be Professer Binns? He could have found out about the locket, taken it from the cave with the help of a house elf & died on the journey back to Hogwarts. The reason of his death is never mentioned & neither is when he died & his given name/s are not mentioned either. I admit theres heaps of holes in my thoughts but when i can be bothered to think more ill fill them in. Can anyone back me up or tell me that im wrong?

your wrong

Who just told this person they're wrong?! The only problems I see with what this person said is the translation issue, and the fact that speculation like this is probably not what this talk page is about. But "you're wrong" spelled incorrectly without a signature is really quite... I can't think of the right word... rude? blunt? non-specific? Emily 21:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

No offence but Prof. Binns works with Dumbledore. I think that perhaps that Pro. Binns would have told the headmaster something like this. Binns most likely knew that Dombledoor was looking for a way to make the doark lord "imortal" so why wouldn't he tell him.. Also houseelves arnt governed by the same laws that humans are. When Binns was drinking the "water" skreaming for the suppossed house elf to stop the house elf would have had to stop. Hense the fatal flaw. (69.150.74.114 02:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)) I cannot agree with Snape being RAB it has to be Regulus and the Avada Kedavra curse does NOT send you flying into the air so I dont believe Dumbledore IS dead, I do believe he meets Harry at Godrics Hollow to take up the search for the Horcruxes again, Tell me your thoughts on this! Levicorpus1207.192.239.42 04:19, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


I'm sure Dumbledore is dead and i don't think Snape had time to switch the neckless, but i admit it is the sort of thing that Rowling would do, and i admit it's strange that Dumbledore flew of the roof. I think that R.A.B. is Sirius Black and the A stands for Animagus and R is his code name for Voldemort, thats right i think that Sirius was an agent of Voldemort (through some complex plot that i can't be bothered to figure out) and he turned back to the good side before Voldemort fell from power. I think that somehow harry will be able to bring Sirius back though the arch thingy and they go to kill Voldemort and Sirius knows where the other Horcruxes are cause he was bad and when they go for Voldemort, he tells Harry about Black being a bad guy and Snape comes along halfway through and turns out to be good and helps them kill Voldemort, the end.

p.s I think that hedwig somehow has harrys mothers spirit in her and Crookshankes somehow has harrys dad in him...just a random guess. let me know what you think

What's speculation?

I see the new section on Andromeda Black, and it's all fine and dandy in my opinion (and even quite interesting), but how do we determine what is speculation, and what isn't? Some person could have their own theory and thought up that it's Andromeda, or someone could have read many speculations on websites in the Harry Potter fan community and decided Andromeda had to be added, but how do we know which is which? Emily 21:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't mateter. This article has room for all theroys. (if the person that they are gessing is a witch or wizard) So this one should be read too and people should be able to base an oppinion on this idea along with every other.

Yes, except that this is Wikipedia: a site that is supposed to be ONLY the facts, that has articles on things discussed from a neutral point of view, and shouldn't have too much "speculation". I mean, this article is about what fans have speculated, and what we KNOW about R.A.B.- facts. The article should NOT contain a paragraph that reads "Hey! I just thought of something! It could be Narcissa before she changed her name to Malfoy, becase we don't know if she changed her first name at any point, or has a middle name!" That's not what the article is for, right? Emily 02:51, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I argued quite some time ago against the addition of rampant speculation (see Archive2 and possibly Archive1 as well), but was overruled by a fair number of people. I'd still like to remove any uncited and/or non-notable speculation. Of all these, I think we should only leave Regulus Black and quite possibly Amelia Bones (but only because she was mentioned as a theory of a notable HP fan, Melissa Analli, I think it was). However, this is an opinion largely left unchanged from quite a while ago for me, so maybe some fresh commentary will help. --Deathphoenix ʕ 05:18, 4 April 2006 (UTC)


I have yet to see this theory on RAB... Upon inspecting the Black family tree, one will notice that there are two Regulus Black's. Most people are assuming that RAB is Regulus Black Jr, Sirius' brother. Regulus Sr. on the other hand has a brother name Arcaturus. If there were indeed two people needed to retrieve the locket, it could be possible that Regulus Sr. and his brother were the two.

Other possibilities

I've nuked the entire "other possibilities" section. The majority of this article is already speculation, and while some of the theories probably shouldn't be here, the ones mention in "Other possibilities" weren't even notable enough to merit individual sections describing each one. If they're not notable enough for that, they're not notable enough to be mentioned in here at all. --Deathphoenix ʕ 17:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


I loved it

I am pretty sure that this is mostly speculation and orginal research, but I don't care, I just loved reading this article! It is fine as it is, don't apply the policy too strictly, violating it sometimes makes wikipedia so much more interesting... Lag 21:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Severe cut back on speculation

As there is very little canon knowledge of R.A.B. this article has been full of speculation for far too long. The only speculation I have left in is obviously Regulus Black, this qualifies as encyclopedic as a hot topic being publicly commented on by J.K. Rowling.

Why not save space and simply direct people to the Regulus Black page?Michaelsanders 23:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
R.A.B. might not be Regulus Black, as it stands currently in canon R.A.B. is an as yet unknown new character. This article will almost definatly be fleshed out after the publication of book 7, and if R.A.B. does turn out to be Regulus then we would probably discuss possible merger then (as with Tom Riddle/Voldemort or Peter Pettigrew/Scabbers). Saving space? don't really need to, after all wikipedia is not paper. Death Eater Dan (Muahaha) 23:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
To be honest I don't agree with cutting everything out. Nigh on everything in this article (apart from the initials in foreign translations) is speculation. Regulus is the best fit, but he's not the only possibility. These others deserve at least some space, even if it is just as "former possible candidates for RAB." Supersheep 23:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Others ought to be mentioned, even if regulus is odds on favourite. This is both to make a record of the debate (this article really records a current event and ongoing search by readers to work out who it is), and also to inject just a bit of doubt so as not to be a total spoiler for book 7.Sandpiper 00:40, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

"Translation" segments duplication

Editor Danlina had previously deleted what appeared to be duplicated information on translated foreign editions regarding the initials R.A.B., and the Black surname. I reverted the deletion, but then later decided that if it appeared to be duplicitous or repetitive, then it probably was, and needed to be fixed. I rearranged the segments somewhat, and combined the two "translations" groups (R.A.B. and Black) into a single Translations subtopic covering both concepts "closer" to each other, but still in separate paragraphs, so the train of thought is more continuous and logical. Hope it helps - it was a bold move, and thanks to Danlina for boldly taking the lead on the effort. --T-dot 17:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Good work T-dot, the section I removed was a paragraph comprised mostly of language translations, the majority of those translations were already in a paragraph higher up in the article. However the article looks much better now cheers T_dot. Death Eater Dan (Muahaha) 18:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Did it ever occur to anybody to analyse the text of RAB's message itself?

Just wondering. A brief and casual glance shows me that there are seven occurences of "I", seven lines in all, fourteen verbs (know, will be, read, want, know, was, discovered, have stolen, intend, destroy, can, face, meet, will be), sixtythree words in all (not countig the initials). Second thought: what about an anagram? Such a long one would be incredibly difficult to solve, but there might be hints. What made me consider this possibility is the unusually casual language - one would not exactly expect that vocabulary but it might be necessary if the text indeed an anagram. Finally, "stolen" is suspicious. Stealing means taking an object from its rightful owner. I do wonder what the choice of words might imply here.

Oh boy - somebody better get the Bible Code-breakers on it... --T-dot 18:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

List of B's

I was thinking of compiling a list of Harry Potter character surnames that begin with "B" and posting that as a sort of "brainstorm" list, not to be judged individually, but mentioned in passing. Not so much to increase the speculation, but to attempt to untilt the article slightly away from the overwhelming support for Regulus Black. It is not a hard task by any means, but I wanted to clear the concept in advance. Someone else is already pushing up Bones family members as an alternative. Others include Brown, Bell, Boot, Brocklehurst, Branstone, Bulstrode, Bletchley, Bole, Baddock, Binns, Babbling, Bagman, Bode, Brand, Borgin, Burke, Bagshot, Borage, Bayliss, Benson, Bishop, Bryce, and probably several more I missed from the List of characters in the Harry Potter books. Comments? --T-dot 18:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe, with links to their family trees.

Also A,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K,L,M,N,O,P,Q,R,S,T,U,V,W,X,Y,Z. Simply south 18:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm baffled by that ... not sure what you are getting at. Are you saying that whoever signed the note with "R.A.B." is not likely to be someone with those initials, or at least someone involved having a surname beginning with a "B", or that it was not really "signed" R.A.B., and that it was just perhaps a closing epithet or something, and that we should therefore include everyone in the Harry Potter Universe on the list of suspected Horcrux thief candidates, regardless of whether they can legitimately be considered an R.A.B. candidate in some way or other? Please explain your last, Simply south. --T-dot 20:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
No, no, no, sorry. I was replying, not specifically for R.A.B. I was meaning it was an interesting and er.. thorough idea to mention creating an article for every single surname in Harry Potter. I was jokingly suggesting that this should also be done for the other letters of the alphabet, although maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea... maybe a brief mention. As for R.A.B i am just awaiting the next novel to find out. Maybe. Simply south 20:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Naw - what I meant was that it might be encyclopedic to provide a short list, in the R.A.B. article, of all the other known surviving wizard family members with surnames beginning with a "B", on the assumption that "R.A.B." is a person, most likely a wizard, with a last name beginning with "B". This should slightly rebalance the article away from such a heavy slant towards Regulus Black, which is still speculative (albeit almost universally accepted), whatever his middle name might be, at least until the truth of the matter is finally revealed. It would seem that this might also perhaps head off some of the Fanforum Fanatics who keep slipping in random alternative RAB's, based on what they read on someone else's blog page or other highly speculative "dumbledoreisnotdead.com" type sites. --T-dot 23:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Amy Benson

Yesterday, I added a paragraph on Amy Benson in the Other Theories section, as we have an article on her and the possibility that she is R.A.B. It is a remote possibility, especially since I can't imagine what R could possibly stand for, but I think it does carry some weight given the significance of the cave. It certainly carries more weight than saying any wizard whose last name begins with B and has unknown first and middle names could be R.A.B.

Regardless, I agree that it is total speculation, and there appears to be consensus that the only speculation worth including on this page is Regulus Black, as that possibility has been acknowledged (not confirmed or denied, but acknowledged) by J.K. Rowling.

However, if we're not going to include this speculation on this page, then we probably shouldn't be including it on Amy Benson either. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 17:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, it shouldn't be noted in Amy Benson either, though one case for including it is that there was someone notable who thought R.A.B. might be Amy Benson. I don't remember who it was, though. --Deathphoenix ʕ 19:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

reversing the name

Perhaps we shouldn't see this curious name as a person with the initials of R. A. B., but like a person who put a code in his name to secure the secrecy of his identity. For example, if I were to place a Z where an A stands, an Y where a B stands, then we get; I. Z. Y. Is this perhaps something to go on with?

Removal of speculation

The speculation and original research is creeping back into the article. Yes the article is based on theory until the release of the 7th book however the only viable theory worthy of entering in an encyclopedic capacity is Regulus, as this is a hot topic that has been comented on by the author and can be sourced as such. Death Eater Dan (Muahaha) 15:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

B.A.R

If you reverse R.A.B. it becomes Bar this could mean it has somthing to do with a bar such as the Hogs Head where numerous other relavent things have happened. --Dr. B

sounds like a wonderfully speculative and convoluted theory that belongs all over the HP fan forum sites and the gossip blog pages along with all the rest of the fan theories. Fits right up with the Mirror of "Erised" (except the whole word-reversing there was a play on the mirror theme). Just please do not present that theory here as encyclopedic material in the main article, or anywhere in the Wikipedia, unless you first bounce it off J. K. Rowling herself and get her to say: "why ... YES - that is exactly correct! How on earth did you figure that out? SUPERB detective work Dr. B!!" ... or something to that effect. Until you get that approval, it does not belong here. The other "theories" that have been presented in the main article have at least been acknowledged by Rowling, or at have a reasonably strong basis in logic and reason, and have been argued-out and agreed-to for inclusion by consensus. Thanks for your input though. --T-dot 12:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Sandbox for Other Theories

We continue to have fans posting alternative theories on who R.A.B. might be. The latest is the old "It may also be Rodolphus And Bellatrix Lestrange" hypothesis. Some time ago (early July), I developed an "Other Theories" section - not to present such alternate theories as canonical or encyclopedic, but to explain why they are not, and that they are widely held as theories, even if they are false. The purpose of this was to "corral" the added theories into a section, and to refute them there. This entire section was deleted out of hand within a week or so as "speculation creeping in" (8 July), and as such, the fan-dals are back re-posting the theories as if they are newly discovered inspirations. That is why I believe we need to address the theories and point out the flaws. I believe this is encyclopedic, and i strongly recommend addressing the issues and posting them in an encyclopedic manner, rather than ignoring them and allowing the non-stop fan-dalism and speculation to continue. The following is a sandbox edition of the Other Theories section, for open discussion ... --T-dot 22:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

==== Other Theories ====
Regulus Black is not the only possible candidate for the identity of R.A.B. Several other characters in the Harry Potter series have last names starting with the letter "B", and whose first and/or middle names have not been provided. It is conceivable that a character from one of these other families might actually be R.A.B. As an example, there is the co-founder of the Borgin and Burkes dark magical objects shop in Knockturn Alley - a "Mr. Borgin", whose first name is unknown. The other co-founder is identified as Cataractus Burke. At one time, Tom Marvolo Riddle was an employee at the shop, and while he was in that capacity he visited Hepzibah Smith in order to gain access to some of her ancient heirlooms.
It is also possible that a known character may have taken a nickname with the initials R.A.B., or posess an alter ego, in the manner that Professor Snape showed in calling himself "the Half-Blood Prince".
One widely spread but disputed theory, that has been discussed at length at various fan forums, is the idea that R.A.B. may in fact be the initials of two or three persons, not just one. This is defended by the notion that Dumbledore needed Harry to assist him in the task of retrieving the Horcrux in the cave. However, the theory is strongly contradicted by the note itself — which is written in first person singular. On seven occasions, the writer of the note said "I" did this or that, and never made even the slightest passing reference to "we" or any accomplice. Ending a note written completely in the first-person singular tense, with a signature using the initials of two or more persons, would seem absurd. This makes the theory that R.A.B. represents the initials of more than one person very doubtful. Nevertheless the problem remains that someone may have had to assist R.A.B. with the task, and one leading candidate that does not contradict the canonical text might be a house-elf, for example Kreacher, which belonged to the Black family.

It is equally important to remember that Walburga Black had burned many names off of the Black family tree, which have survived to this day. It is proposed that R.A.B. is one of the members of these 'severed' branches of the Black family tree [a descendant of Phineas or Marius Black (both were disowned for supporting muggle rights and for being a squib respectively)] who have used the Black surname to throw a bit of dust over themselves to give them the time needed to destroy the Horcrux.20:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)Sagittarius Flame

"New theory: R.A.B. = Regulus Black hiding as Stubby Boardman"

Following was posted by User:Myrrh8 - and subsequently deleted as clearly speculative:

In Harry Potter book V, ch. 10, an article in the magazine "The Quibbler" reports of a character named "Stubby Boardman" who is quoted to not only closely resemble Sirius Black (very likely if he has the features of Sirius' brother Regulus) but who is said to have "retired from public life ... nearly fifteen years ago", the time at which Regulus Black supposedly died. Rowling, when asked about Regulus prior to the publication of The Half-Blood Prince, during World Book Day online chat, March 4, 2004, answered the question: "Will we be hearing anything from Sirius Black's brother, Regulus, in future books?" said: "Well, he's dead, so he's pretty quiet these days." This could be an indication that since his identity as Black is "dead", Regulus keeps "quiet" under the synonym of "Stubby Boardman".

The reason for deletion is as follows. We have allowed the "reasonable" theory that Regulus Black may be R.A.B. (whatever his middle name might be) due to the fact that all foreign language translated editions show the same correlation between the translated surnames for Black and the last initial in the translated versions of R.A.B. That is reasonable and sufficient.

This new theory that Regulus Black is alive and living under the name Stubby Boardman, on the basis of random information from The Quibbler that he "resembles" Sirius is simply not reasonable. The Quibbler, in the Harry Potter Universe, is as non-authoritative and unreliable a source for information as a source can be, even after the occasional random tidbit of truth it may on occasion produce by accident. But then to further stretch Rowling's assertion that Regulus is "dead, so he's pretty quiet these days" to mean that he is alive and living quietly as "Stubby Boardman" is simply overstretching the bounds of reason.

Until the Seventh Book is published, or until someone can get Rowling to admit that Regulus is alive and living as Stubby Boardman, this theory cannot stand in the Wikipedia - which must be Verifiable (WP:V) and based on Reliable Sources (WP:RS, and not based on fan speculation or Original Research (WP:NOR). --T-dot 18:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I qoute from the JK Rowling website. In asnwer to the question "Is Regulus Black Stubby Boardman?" Her answer: "No, he isn't." Jasca Ducato 19:46, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

"Riddle ain´t bad"

What do you think?

No.

There are some severe holes in the "Riddle Ain't Bad" theory. For Example, whoever replaced the horcrux with the fake obviously didn't like Voldemort and was planning to destroy the real horcux/locket. So, why would an enemy of Voldemort (Tom Marvolo Riddle) sign a letter left to the Dark Lord as "Riddle Ain't Bad". If you must speculate, please don't be so disposed to suggest something entirely unreasonable. Even The Quibbler has some truth to it (Harry's story published in said magazine to tell those in the wizarding community about Voldemort's return is one example). 20:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)Sagittarius Flame

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/2E/a/Talk%7ER.A.B._Archive_3_857c.html"