Jump to content

Talk:Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

watch

I am responding to the Wikipedia editorial note that this summary is too long. On having read it, I am inclined to say it is not quite long enough. J.K. Rowling's story, while quite easy to read, has a number of themes which are not easy to unravel. It is easy to overlook telling points on a first reading. Also there are differences between the book and the film, which are not simply matters of abbreviation. So, given that both the book and the film are part of our popular culture, it would be worthwhile to have a summary with enough depth to make main themes clear. If someone wants to read a summary shorter than this, they are not really interested in the work of art that Rowling has given us. Hopefully the Wikipedia entries should not provide 'dumbed down' versions of literary works, which allow people to feel happy with a superficial understanding, but rather to provide doorways to deeper understanding.

Hugh James 66.81.100.246 (talk) 17:26, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Plot Summary

Ok, I read it. I know Azkaban is a relatively short book, but come on guys. That is not a plot summary, it is a joke. Why not just write 'well, Harry went to school again', and leave it at that? (oops, silly me, that is the sort of thing a vandal would do if he rubbed out the real plot summary and just put in something stupid) Sandpiper 00:14, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Further to my last comment, and indeed having read the equivalent pages for each book. There seems to be two schools of thought as to whether a short plot summary or a long plot summary is preferable. Some articles have one, and some have the other. I see no reason why the article should not have both. The total is still not excessively long for an article, particularly if the other incidental information is placed at the start where anyone can read it quickly. In any case, the articles do not contain very much more than the plot summaries, anyway. Accordingly, I have restored the original long summary, following on from the short one. It would appear that each article originally had long summaries, until someone removed them to separate articles. I can see why some people may prefer the short one (I think the long version here is actually too long too), but I see no reason not to have both. Sandpiper 22:45, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Thats one hell of a long plot summary, I think it is good and has had a lot of hard work to put it together but it probably shouldn't be called 'summary' as this implies a short description, which this deffinatly aint! But leave the body of text as it is. --Dan 01:56, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I've started to shorten the text a bit. I'm leaving in most of the details, but text that is already handled elsewhere like the description of Azkaban has been removed. -JohnRDaily 16:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Can't we just create another page for summery of the plot and have a far more abbreaviated version here? Evil Deep Blue 03:29, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
My argument against doing that is that SparkNotes already has extensive Plot Summaries on its website (chapter by chapter in fact), and we don't need that much detail here. These are meant to be plot overviews, not entire breakdowns of each scene. This is by far one of the longest book summaries, so it needs to be pruned where possible. Cybertooth85 17:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Has JKR ever said anything about the (blatantly obvious) similarities between her Dementors and Philip Pullman's Spectres (which I think predate Dementors)? I know both have explained their respective creations as manifestations of depression, but they seem too similar, even in little details, to be merely parallel thinking?Michaelsanders 00:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Would it be sensible to split the plot summary up into sections, like some of the other HP novels with extrenuous plot summaries? ~~ THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 09:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Also regarding the plot summary, there appears to be a hole between the fourth and fifth paragraphs of the summary (it skips from the first appearance of the Marauder's Map to Professor Trelawney's prediction). Is a 'repair' in order? Hallpriest9 (Talk | Archive) 14:47, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

the plot summary has information in it from the book that is not featured in the movie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.6.247.123 (talk) 11:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

That would be correct, because this article is about the book, not the film. DP76764 (Talk) 15:21, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

§ Is the last sentence of the plot summary accurate? It reads: "Harry visits Lupin before he leaves, and as they say goodbye, Lupin is certain that they will meet again. But then sirius Black ended up being evil and attacking Hogwarts, and then they all died except Dumbledore." This doesn't seem right, e.g., I'm pretty sure "they" didn't all die, and that Sirius isn't evil. Wakalix (talk) 02:43, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

No, they didn't all die and Sirius was not evil. It appears the page was vandalized. Also, I've done a major overhaul of the plot summary as the previous one was far too broad and left out important details, rendering the overall synopsis confusing.PNW Raven (talk) 11:52, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Images

Wouldn't it be proper to put the French cover on the French Wikipedia page and limit images on the English Wikipedia page to images of English versions of the books? -Phi*n!x 01:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

See Talk:Harry Potter#Foreign language cover images. Brian Jason Drake 06:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Ner නෙරන්ජන් තෙන්නකෝන් (talk) 08:36, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Voldemort

"This is the only Harry Potter book so far in which Lord Voldemort has not appeared in any form." Can we take out "so far", since Voldemort is obviously going to appear in book seven? 84.70.221.48 22:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Wrong Illustrator

The actual UK Illustrator is Cliff Wright, and not Jason Cockcroft, he did the Order of the Phoenix onwards

Why is Jason Cockcroft still showing up on the main page? When I go to edit, in the text box it says Cliff Wright, but continues to show Jason Cockcroft. Aloha princess 20:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)aloha princess

It is in the Template, I'll go and fix it shortly. Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • count) 07:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Confusion

I am an avid Harry Potter fan, and I don't ever recall anything about "Lee Phillips" and a "Piranha of Azkaban". Is this page just a joke? Because if it is, shouldn't this page be considered for deletion? Danny Sepley 05:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Oops, sorry--I don't know how I commented on the wrong page. For some reason I saw a page with the title "Lee Phillips and the Pirahna of Azkaban". And now it's disappeared. Danny Sepley 18:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It redirects to here. I checked it out, and the only thing in the history was the redirect. ~~ THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 22:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, "The Dark Lord". I did not realize what was going on. Is that like a practical joke kind of page, or something else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danny sepley (talk • contribs) 18:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Most likely, someone who created a stupid page for the heck of it, so yeah, someone playing some sort of a joke. Anakinjmt 20:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Hermoine plot details

In the "tensions" section I added a bit about Hermoine's stress and heavy workload, as it plays a major role in her conflict with Ron and Harry. It also supports the later plot summary reference to the Time-Turner. 23skidoo (talk) 15:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Should we mention Cho?

POA *is* the book where Harry starts to notice Cho Chang, his first girlfriend. Oughtn't we to take a note of that? or is that too minor a detail? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelica K (talk • contribs) 01:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Critical Reception

There is no critical reception in this article. I managed to find a New York Times reviewhere. I'm not sure how to break it down, however. --Glimmer721 talk 01:28, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Harry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban is about a man named Sirius Black has excaped from Azkaban Prison and is going to kill Harry as Mr.Weasley told him.But when Harry gets Sirius he trys to kill him,but the only thing is Sirius is trying to get Rons rat scabbers. So Sirius turns Rons rat into a human and ordered him to tell Harry what he dont,Scabbers gave Lilly and James Potter over to Voldemort and thats how they died,Ron was shocked that his pet rat was a human and he was also scarred at the same time.Sirius Black killed Scabbers,but even low Scabbers wasent who he really was Ron still loved and missed him.Harry was confused of what happened so Siruis told him that he was his godfather,Harry was pleased that he still had family and asked Sirius if he could come and stay with him but Sirius said that he wasent aloud but maby when you are older.Harry was sad that he had to go back to staying with his uncle and auntie but atlest he still had some family left. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.250.64.87 (talk) 13:18, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

changes to entry

I changed the release date of the paperback edition of the novel from 1 October 2001 to 2 October 2001. I was wrong and its been like that for 20 days now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.55.196 (talk) 21:38, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dusti (talk · contribs) 04:00, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

The article looks absolutely great! I see a couple of concerns, which I'll put below:

  • There are some claims made that need to be sourced:
  • The book won the 1999 Whitbread Children's Book Award, the Bram Stoker Award, the 2000 Locus Award for Best Fantasy Novel, and was short-listed for other awards, including the Hugo.
  • The book sold 64,000 copies in three days.
  • The book was published on 8 July 1999 in the United Kingdom, by Bloomsbury,
Note This is sourced, but incorrectly. The link for the source simply lists the publisher and volume sold, but not the date. As the key concept of this text is when and where it was published, if you're going to source that - the source needs to state that.
  • Under Critical Reception you mention a negative review from Anthony Holden. For uniformity, I'd include a quote from him on his negative reception of the book, instead of a summary - as all of the other reviewers have a quote. I wouldn't fail the article for it, but I believe it would benefit the article.

This is the major stuff I am seeing for now. I'll add more (if any) as time goes on. The key point is that each claim (whether it be an award, etc) will need to be sourced. Dusti*Let's talk!* 04:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Dusti, thanks for taking the time to review my nomination.
  • I couldn't establish what was wrong with the awards pages, as they all listed Prisoner of Azkaban
  • Number of copies sourced
  • Publication dates, and by whom, sourced
  • Quote from review included
Hope this is OK now. Thanks, Matty.007 10:14, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Excellent job guys! I've  passed the article.

Successful good article nomination

I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of July 25, 2013, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: ✓ Pass
2. Factually accurate?: ✓ Pass
3. Broad in coverage?: ✓ Pass
4. Neutral point of view?: ✓ Pass
5. Article stability? ✓ Pass
6. Images?: ✓ Pass

Excellent work! If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— 01:14, 25 July 2013 (UTC)Dusti*Let's talk!*

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:57, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:32, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:36, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Harry_Potter_and_the_Prisoner_of_Azkaban/Archive_1&oldid=1243053914"