Talk:Hermione Granger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hermione Granger article.
Article policies
Good article Hermione Granger has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
August 15, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
This article uses British English dialect and spelling. Some terms that are used in it differ from, or are not used in, American English. For more information, see American and British English differences. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Archive
Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3


[edit] Pictures

There's only one picture in here. I seem to remember, however, that there were a number of very good images in here, e. g. where Hermione was wearing the beautiful dress from the Yule Ball. Where have they all gone??? Deleting such beautiful and important pictures was an act of vandalism!!! --Krawunsel (talk) 12:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Does no one have an answer? --Krawunsel (talk) 18:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Well I'm not sure what the pictures were or where they went but 9 times out of 10 the reason pictures are removed is because they violate copyright laws. Perhaps that is why they were removed. Darkage7 (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
We could, however, put some pictures that are in accordance with the wiki policy. Just my two pence. BlackPearl14Pirate Lord-ess 23:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
One of the criteria for fair use is that they qualify as minimal use. There needs to be a justification for why each image adds significantly to the article. I think the picture of her from the Ball would be acceptable because it was notable that her appearance was dramatically different in that scene. For An Angel (talk) 18:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Little girl category

This seems an appropriate category, as she is in fact a little girl. For the majority of the books, she is under age of 18, which qualifies her as a girl. We are not using the end point of the stories to determine her article's content; we are using the largest portion of her fictionally notable life. Were that not true, the discussions about her and Ron's sexuality (or Krum's for that matter) would have continued on unabated, rather than being closed for discussion as inappropriate. As well, the name of the article is Hermione Granger, not Granger-Weasley or simply Hermione Weasley - that imparts that the greater part of why we know about her is because the books cover a sizable portion of her childhood. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd be okay with it going either way, mainly because I'm worried that if we argue too much about it then it will just get deleted and then become a nonissue. (See: here) My opinion however is that she does belong in the category because she is most notable as a child and is an adult only in the epiloge of the last book. For An Angel (talk) 18:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I respectfully disagree. My problem is in the wording of the name of the category. What exactly does 'little girl' mean? What are the criteria? Are we talking about physical stature or age? Obviously age, but it isn't clear enough, IMO. And at what age does one stop being a little girl? Perhaps because at the age of 24, I'm not too far removed from my teenage years, but I have never thought of teenagers as being little girls, I think of my eight-year-old niece as a little girl, but I wouldn't consider a high school freshman a little girl. For me, the term is for roughly ten-year-olds and under. This all seems moot, as the category looks headed for deletion. As an aside, I could support the recreation of the deleted 'Fictional children' category, but the criteria for inclusion in this one is just far too vague. faithless (speak) 18:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree that it was a poor choice of words for the category. I meant "little girl" to mean "female child" and hopefully if the category doesn't get deleted at the CfD they will rename it to that. For An Angel (talk) 19:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Faithless, Little Girl is really for "little" girls and not teenagers which she is in six books out of seven considering in the wizarding world that 17 is the day you become an adult. A little girl should be considered as people in Primary school, not in secondary schools in other words, Hogwarts. Hermione Granger is no little girl, she is a teenager and in the final book she is in adult. Jammy (talk) 19:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
In retrospect, so do I. 'Little girl' is too vague. If there is a category for fictional teenagers, then the article (as well as many others) would fit in it. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
If the category gets renamed to Category:Fictional female children would it then be okay to include her? Consider that the already established Category:Children states its only for "articles about individuals who became notable as children (before age 18)." For An Angel (talk) 21:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article

The article doesn't bear the "Good Article" icon (at the top right) and such, it's only mentioned here in the talk page. I'd do the edit myself, but I don't know how to. -- AvatarMN (talk) 02:07, 11 April 2008 (UTC)