Jump to content

Talk:Magical creatures in Harry Potter/Archive 1

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

Hokey the House Elf

I have to express some scepticism that Hokey was sent to Azkaban, as stated in the article: "later dying of mental anguish induced by the Dementors in Azkaban." As far as we know, no non-human creature has ever been sent there and the novel Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince clearly states that the Ministry did not fault Hokey for Hepzibah Smith's death, her having been "old and confused". It says she had been convicted, yes, but also that it had been an accident. Please remove.

Phoenix

I thought I saw an article specifically about phoenixes in the Harry Potter world, but now I can't find it. If it has been deleted in favor of a generic phoenix (mythology) article, I would like to see it restored; if it's still here somewhere, it needs better links; if it never existed, I'd like to see in created.

There's the Fawkes article, he's the only phoenix in the series. --Kizor 13:59, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

There is also an article Phoenix in popular culture, with a paragraph on the Harry Potter phoenixes. Erudil 17:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Das Baz (talk • contribs)

These contributions are not unsigned; Erudil is also my signature. Erudil 18:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Nagini

The last paragraph on Nagini topic says author J.K. Rowling declares it is the same snake Harry Potter met in The Philosopher's Stone, but it lacks sources. I could not find any interview of her stating that and my research makes it look like a rumour spread and reblogged on Tumblr. The snake that appears in the first book is a boa constrictor and Nagini is pictured as a python (as the first paragraph says). Therefore, I'm removing the last line (as following) until a trustful source appears.

Nagini is the same snake that Harry set free from the zoo on Dudleys birthday. Rowling stated, "Yes, it’s rather funny, really, that next to no-one realised the snake that Harry set free in Philosopher’s Stone turned out to be Voldemort’s final Horcrux, Nagini." WicCaesar (talk) 22:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like another case of pointless retconning by the author. No, Mrs Rowling it is not "rather funny" that no-one realised because you just made it up. There is more than one python in the world and nothing in what the zoo snake says to Harry, indicates any link. Deposuit (talk) 09:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Considering, as noted above, this quote was a hoax and the snake from the first book was not Nagini, I'm not sure what your point is. --86.45.25.165 (talk) 03:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Thestrals in 'Unmentioned' section

Thestrals are briefly mentioned in the section on winged horses in Fantastic Beasts. As a mater of fact, the article even states this. I'm removing it from the unmentioned section.--Romulus 05:30, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Either you forgot to do this or somebody re-added it; regardless, I have now removed it.--86.45.25.165 (talk) 03:11, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Does anybody know whether OTHER animals (magical or not) can see the Thestrals only if they have seen death? 201.35.230.181 (talk) 05:08, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Egg thing

What was the worm like thing haching from an egg in Hagrids hut in the Third movie?

That was a baby dragon. In the books, he names her Norbert without realizing she was a female. Seansinc (talk) 19:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
What happens in the movies has no concern with the Harry Potter books, Wiki goes by the books, not the movies. That "worm thing" was just a creation by the film makers and has nothing to do with Fantastic Beasts and Where to find them. --Jammy (talk) 18:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

It can't be a baby dragon, we saw one in the first film and you saw the trouble it caused.

You cannot simply duplicate link syntax to every subject. Some of these links don't lead anywhere. Or lead to pages that do not ever mention the item linked. In this case, the link should be red, or there should be no link at all.

One solution would for links without corresponding articles to link to a page listing items in this section that do not have articles.

Redirect is not explained

In the paragraph about Crookshanks, it says: "Rowling has confirmed that Crookshanks is half kneazle". Kneazle redirects to this article but isn't explained. Can someone add the description? --Judith (talk) 19:08, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. :) faithless (speak) 23:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! --Judith (talk) 09:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Unicorns

If a section for unicorns really needed in this article? Their role in the series was really minor if compared to the rest of the creatures. No unicorn character was directly mentioned except from the dead one in PS and the one in Care of MC class. I think that we should get rid of it, to avoid this article being too long. Lord Opeth (talk) 03:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. faithless (speak) 10:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

XXXX

Do they really categorize with the X's? Basketball110 01:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, try reading Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (the book, not the article). --EinsteiNewton 05:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


Diference between Zombies and Inferi

I known that both creatures exist in Harry Potter's World, but I'm not sure what is the difference. In my opinion, zombies are more like the dead of Nigth of the Living Dead or Resident Evil, while Inferi are the zombies of voodoo.


Could it be, or are the same creature with a different name?--Fampyre (talk) 16:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting Question. The Harry Potter Lexicon doesn't comment on this, and I can't actually find any differences. Maybe they are the same thing? However as we cannot speculate we may never know --Maurice45 (talk) 18:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Zombies don't necessarily have any motivation besides cannibalism. Inferi are dead bodies that have been re-animated by and are subservient to Wizards, they may be said to be a type of zombie although I don't believe they have cannibalistic tendencies. It is implied in the book that if you are killed by inferi, you join their ranks, presumably serving the same wizard master. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.189.28.130 (talk) 16:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

In the first book, Quirrell mentions receiving his turban from an African prince as a gift for getting rid of a zombie. Now, this comes up long before Inferi are mentioned, so it's possible that they're the same creature, but that the name was invented later on in the series [Jo had a huge world to keep track of, after all]. However, I agree with the above idea that zombies are ruled by instinctual drives rather than the will of an overseer. Also, the rebirth of a zombie occurs spontaneously while Inferi aren't created unless a wizard/witch willfully brings them back. Other than that, they pretty much sound like the same creature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.35.91.10 (talk) 22:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Zombies and Inferi are not the same creature. Zombies are caused by a rabies-like disease getting into a person, Inferi are corpses brought to "life" through dark magic. Zombies are NOT corpses because they need blood flow to bring the virus to the brain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.40.168.187 (talk) 10:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually, zombies being caused by disease and desiring flesh is pure Hollywood. The ones in The Night of the Living Dead were originally going to be called ghouls, from what I know, The Ghul of folklore actually is like the Hollywood zombie, except Arabian and sometimes connected with Djinn. The zombie from myth and folklore comes from Vodou legends and basically is like an Inferi, enslaved to a Necromancer, but sometimes described as being better able to pass as human, much like the OP stated. See this site's article on the monster. Given how much research Jo did while writing, it's likely that "zombie" is simply the African/Afro diasporic-based term for Inferi, or maybe a certain type of Inferi. Just wanting to clear this up. It's an easy mistake to make for those who aren't folklore buffs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.246.129.0 (talk) 14:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Just a small note on Dementors.

I added in the Dementors section that they were no longer used as guards in the prison Azkaban after Voldemort's death. Why? Because it's fact. One other thing, I don't think it was ever said in the books that Umbridge sent the Dementors after Harry in the 5th book, just saying. --Bending Unit (talk) 15:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Bending Unit

Not arguing with you, but I'm almost completely sure it was; will check and get back to you --Maurice45 (talk) 19:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Found: He never knew I ordered the Dementors to go after Potter last summer --- Dolores Umbridge, HP5, Out of the Fire, page 658 (British Version) --Maurice45 (talk) 19:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

according to the books the dementors have empty sockets where the eyes would have been. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.75.209 (talk) 10:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Female Centaurs

In myth, there is a female Celtic Centaur, Epona. So they exist in mythology. People are basing the 'female centaurs don't exist' off one of the WRONG answers in the W.O.M.B.A.T. test. Which means all the other 'facts' based off the wrong answers are also wrong. They said they don't harm foals. If they don't have foals, which come from female centaurs obviously.. how would they know what a foal is? JK Rowling can't possibly suggest that in a childrens book that male centaurs are mating with female humans, when they don't even like humans.

This source: http://www.theoi.com/Georgikos/KentauroiThessalioi.html Speaks of female centaurs from greek translations.

Actually, it's fairly well-acknowledged that centaurs in Greek mythology liked to rape women.
(http://h2g2.com/dna/h2g2/A647129) I'm not entirely sure that JK would have been ignorant of that, considering the amount of work she's put into incorporating "real" mythological creatures in to the Potterverse. And nowhere in the series does it state that a) foals necessarily come from female centaurs or b) that male centaurs don't reproduce asexually. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nachturnal (talk • contribs) 13:03, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Redirection of "Magical creatures"

"Magical creatures" redirects to this page, even though the Harry Potter universe is not the only source of them. Why is this? --DanMat6288 (talk) 01:16, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Elder Wand

Um...Where in Deathly Hallows is it ever stated that the Elder Wand has a Thestral-hair core? I've read Deathly Hallows several times and don't recall this at all. Dbutler1986 (talk) 19:37, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Not sure if its in Deathly Hallows, but on JK Rowling's website (NOT harrypotter.com/.co.uk) it has a chart of wands, who owns them and what they were made from, and it states the Elder Wand as Thestral-Hair core. Lord loss210 (talk) 17:22, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:copyright

The list of magical beasts is not necessarily a copyright violation (Rowling does not own the copyright on fairies, imps or pixies), but it could be argued that the Ministry of Magic classifications are copyvio (the descriptors of each level of classification were taken straight from the book). The list is important because it explains to kids which creatures are "real" legendary creatures and which Rowling made up. So I reinstated the list but removed reference to the MM classification. Serendipodous 11:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 20:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Magical creatures (Harry Potter) → Magical creatures in Harry Potter — Conformity with Magic in Harry Potter, Places in Harry Potter, List of spells in Harry Potter, Magical objects in Harry Potter, etc. Parenthetical phrases are typically used in article titles for disambiguation, when a term has multiple different meanings (e.g. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film) vs. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (game)). But "Magical creatures" means the same thing in the Harry Potter universe as it does anywhere else, i.e., creatures that are magical. Propaniac (talk) 14:41, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Dobby

In the Dobby section (3rd paragraph 4th line down), it is mentioned that Dobby appears for a second time in Order of the Phoenix, but that he appears also in Goblet of Fire and Chamber of Secrets. Wouldn't this then be his third appearance? I'm going to change it, but I want it to be recorded on here just in case there was a special reason for the previous wording. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sfperez32 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to point out some further interesting edits concerning Dobby. Thanks, Matthew Yeager (talk) 01:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah was it done on purpose the whole Children..... thing? I really can't tell it could go both ways on that one. If someone thinks its edited delete those periods if it not then I guess don't.........James Pandora Adams —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.136.203 (talk) 23:13, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Dwarfs

In the Regulation and classification section, there is a random bullet that says "dwarfs, delivered valentines day cards in chamber of secrets." I don't know what that is doing there. Should it be deleted? (I'm new to this, by the way, sorry if I'm doing something wrong) - Silver Diadem (talk) 01:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Either you forgot to do this or somebody re-added it; regardless, I have now removed it.--86.45.25.165 (talk) 03:11, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

basilisk death by rooster

in the entry about basilisks it says that a roosters call can kill it. can someone do some research and see if you cant find a source? it seems unlikely and i dont recall it. thank you zeroro(talk)(edits) 07:28, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

The Thestrals and the Jersey Devil

Why not mention the similarities between Thestrals and the Jersey Devil? 93.211.61.36 (talk) 14:53, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Probably because no one thought of it. That would be original research. Mezigue (talk) 12:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Just too damn big.

Much like List of Harry Potter characters was a couple of years ago, this page is getting too damn big, and too full of needless additions.

Many entries offer no contribution to the article (or even the HP universe,) and I propose that a purge takes place.

Comments?

Chaheel Riens (talk) 12:37, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you Chaheel. Much here is irrelevant to the HP stories and is general folklore. My suggestion is to limit the section to those creatures specifically mentioned in the novels as part of the story. I would also refer/link to Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them, but not list the creatures mentioned in that unless part of the novels.

Proxxt (talk) 04:44, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Trimmed. Let's see how it pans out. Chaheel Riens (talk) 21:30, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
It may have been a while ago, but as can be seen here, the comment was that creatures in Fantastic Beasts were not going to be included in the list. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:00, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Pigwidgeon

This article lists Pigwidgeon's breed as a Scops Owl, but in her recent thoughts on owls in the Harry Potter series on Pottermore.com, J.K. Rowling mentions that Pigwidgeon is a Little Owl: http://www.pottermore.com/en/book4/chapter28/moment1/owls. In the article for Pigwidgeon on Harry Potter Wikia, the introductory sentences make reference to this, but it is later stated that Pigwidgeon is a Scops Owl as per Rowling's website. Thoughts? Enchantedsleeper (talk) 15:58, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Griphook's fate.

In the book, Griphook disappears after betraying Potter & co - he's never heard of again, so his fate is unknown.

In the films, after the devastation of Potter & co leaving via dragon, Griphook is shown as one of the many dead, still clutching the sword of Gryffindor, just before it disappears into the ether.

We see his dead body, with no clue as to who killed him so we cannot say he was killed by Voldemort. He could have been killed by a Death Eater, Voldemort, the Dragon, or even by falling masonry from the damage caused by the dragon's passing.

In the absence of facts, it's sufficient to say he's dead. Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:58, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Magical creatures in Harry Potter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:30, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Magical creatures in Harry Potter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Isn't the exclusion of "fantastic beasts" misleading?

We're presenting an incomplete list as if it were complete. Also, why "Fantastic Beasts"? Why are creatures mentioned in it, which included a paragraph of information each, inherently less notable than, say, the cockatrice, banshee or bicorn, none of which got more than a name-only mention? Serendipodous 07:08, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, you're right about it being presented as "complete" - so while we discuss, I've changed that because it's obviously misleading. Mention in "Fantastic Beasts" but not the books themselves is deemed non-worthy simply because it's crufty. A line has to be drawn to prevent the article becoming bloated, and as with the other HP articles - if the creature doesn't have either extensive mention in the books, or is relevant to the plot in some way, then there's no reason for it to be mentioned.
I would go further to suggest that another reason "Fantastic Beasts" only creatures are not mentioned is because there are a great many people who have only read the books (or seen the films) and creatures in the Extended Universe are confusing and irrelevant to the story arc. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:42, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Magical creatures in Harry Potter. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 16:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Magical creatures in Harry Potter. 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) 04:57, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Magical creatures in Harry Potter. 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) 00:09, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Magical creatures in Harry Potter. 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) 16:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Nagini's portrayal

I've removed the comment about controversy for the following reasons:

  • It's sourced to a single article, which in no way covers the claims of "many"
  • Rowling can't win, can she? The role is cast to an Asian lady, she gets hammered for reinforcing perceived stereotypes. If the role had gone to a caucasian (wo)man you can bet she'd be lambasted for propping up the white bias in her films and work.

Chaheel Riens (talk) 13:58, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

House Elves/Dobby

The paragraph about House Elves currently sports the following piece of text:

>> Dobby, the most prominent house elf in the series, died in tragic circumstances. He was wintering with his yacht in The Gulf of Mexico when he decided to sail through hurricane Barbara. Being completely off his face on amphetamines he didn’t realise the dangers and subsequently died of auto-erotic aspgixation attached to the mast. It is become known as ‘Dobby’s Tragedy’ where yachting goes wrong. <<

I somehow sincerely doubt this could be canon in any way, since Rowling also always stated her Harry Potter universe being "child-friendly".

There seems to be other vandalism in the article, but this one looks the most suspicious. --2001:8003:4E7D:C700:B035:A201:D1D3:F1C9 (talk) 10:06, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:42, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:52, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Archive 1
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Magical_creatures_in_Harry_Potter/Archive_1&oldid=1136979392"