Talk:Emma Watson/Archive 3

Recent Edits
My recent edits were mainly a translation from the German Wikipedia although I took some liberties with the syntax, and the words used so I am sorry if it is inappropriate in anyway. I am also sorry if I somehow added a fact (such as the brother's age which I now see is mentioned on the talk page) that was neglected for a reason, however I feel that the German Wikipedia had a bit more information. If you want to revert go ahead, but I'd recommend that you instead just tweeked the faults of my translation. Thanks, Chooserr 08:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * If you read through this talk page, you will notice we have discussed some of the items you have taken the liberty of adding, and you have included several other highly unsubstantiated claims involving school plays. Until there is a reliable source for such information, it should not be included. Her brother's age was included in a trivia section which has been removed several times in the past as highly unencyclopedic. --Kevin Walter 10:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Kevin is correct; also, it should be noted that Wikipedia cannot serve as a reliable source for itself, including across Wikis. RadioKirk (u|t|c)  12:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Well personally I see nothing wrong with mentioning her brothers age, and as for it being "approximate" who says "yeah, this is my two year three months and fourteen days old brother or anything like that"?
 * Also the part she played in the plays (which was the only information I added on the subject was gotten from the portugese wikipedia. And there is a whole page of archived material here - http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Emma_Watson/Archiv - about things you consider unreliabe including the money... Chooserr 13:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Her brother's age would be fine in his article, should he ever reach notability; it's peripheral here. RadioKirk (u|t|c)  13:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * But the only problem I really have is that to say that the de.wikipedia doesn't count as a reliable source when they obvious have worked as hard on it as you all have on this one just seems wrong to me...Chooserr 14:02, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter. I've put tremendous work into making Lindsay Lohan a featured article, for example; it would not be considered reliable for other Wikis unless they also copied over the sources used in the article. Please read WP:RS for the guideline and why it exists. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c)  14:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Well I inquired on the de.wikipedia talk page and was given a link back to the page's content, but through searching I found this - http://www.emmaempire.net/archives/cms.de.emmasfortune.html - website, presumably from which the infromation was taken. Can you give it a look, and tell me if it is alright to re-add some of the finacial information, which was removed? Chooserr 03:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't see an English version of the page; does it cite a source for the data? RadioKirk (u|t|c)  04:05, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * As far as I can tell from the translation, it does not. If I am not mistaken, it does some original research. --Kevin Walter 04:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Not surprising; there seems to be a dearth of WP:RS on this subject... RadioKirk (u|t|c)  13:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't list another source, but I thought that we could determine whether or not it was a reliable source in and of its self. Do we need every source on this encyclopedia to link to another source, which presumably would link to another ad infinitum? Chooserr 01:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Of course not; if there is reason to believe the original source is reliable (<- and, may I ask, have you yet read this guideline?). I see nothing by which I would trust this site's reliability (such as scans of official press releases, indications a site has earned respectability through its own reporting, etc. RadioKirk (u|t|c)  02:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Well said. Fansites in general should not be considered reliable sources. --Kevin Walter 02:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

School
Emma will NOT LEAVE headington school. That was a false rumour a british newspaper told. But she will stay at Headington, that's why she was choosen to be one of the leaders at Rock Challenge next year - the leader of the Headington Team. Emma WILL stay so please remove the false information from the site. (Vavz 14:44, 05 June 2006)

Could someone clear up why nameless (that is IP useres) tend to change the school info as beeing false (as stated above) and the Wikipedia editors (I mean those people with experience here) keep changing it back. Do you have info from a reliable source? If you do, it would be nice if you stated it.

I am brand new here please tell me what I am doing wrong so that I do not make the same mistakes in the future.

"Emma Watson, the actress who plays Hermione Granger in the Harry Potter series of films, attends the school and will be one of her school's Rock Challenge leaders." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headington_School%2C_Oxford

Should we add this information to the main page article so people will stop editing the false rumor? --Cowarth 16:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Here is sufficient; that's what talk pages are for. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c)  16:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * She'll be studying As levels (Advanced Level). She talked about the sorts of subjects she likes in lots of interviews, and this is the point in her school career where she'll be able to study more or less what she wants. Because she goes to a posh school, she may have to do General Studies as well. User: Amoammo

What subjects is she studying? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.30.142.219 (talk • contribs)


 * You'll have to ask HPFilms. RadioKirk (u|t|c)  20:34, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Name
This is the only biography I have ever seen that has a citation next to their name. Surely that's a bit unnecessary? I don't keep up with the discussion here, so maybe there is some significant reason I don't know about - otherwise I would just edit the page... ugen64 18:32, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, ugen64. I believe there's been some common misinformation on the Internet about what exactly her full name is and after whom, if anybody, she's named. That's why there's a citation, if I remember right. — President Lethe 19:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, ugen64, President Lethe is exactly right: there is misinformation that is common, that is why. Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint also have citations because there's misinformation about their middle names; Lindsay Lohan has one because her professional and birth middle names are different. Citations are required any time anything is or could be in doubt. :) <tt style="color:#161;">RadioKirk (u|t|c) </tt> 20:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Maintenance
Maintained

-- I see you put a lot of work in here so I'm adding this. Editing from a PDA atm so I can't edit this page as a whole; it won't submit, so I had to add a new section - this one. Could someone please move it to the topl Cheers — G <B>a</B> ry Kirk | talk! 18:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, only if others who've done their fair share put their names in, too ;) <tt style="color:#161;">RadioKirk (u|t|c) </tt> 18:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure, well, that isn't me, so they can either do that themselves to show willing, or you can find them - there's something on the Toolserver, under /~daniel I believe, showing who's contributed to an article - though I guess it's corrupted these days...sigh. — G <B>a</B> ry Kirk | talk! 19:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Myspace
I think that Emma has her own myspace page. You can find it by searching: www.myspace.com/emmawatson. DavidJJJ 19:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Looks pretty real. MySpace and Emma are popular enough that it could be a knock-off, but this doesn't look fake. Seven-point-Mystic 23:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I highly doubt thats her myspace. She obviously wouldn't put "I am the real Emma Watson. Some of you may not belive me but, I'm not asking you to and if you don't well" Its not like she trolls MySpace for fakes, and the real people don't put that. --www.ewonline.net 00:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * To be perfectly honest, until/unless we get official confirmation from HPFilms or a newsletter from Ms. Watson released by HPFilms, the answer is and must be "no." <tt style="color:#161;">RadioKirk (u|t|c) </tt> 20:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I totally agree with you on that. --Ewonline 22:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * And I'll second that. - RockerballAustralia 11:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


 * No way this is beauti Emma's site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.114.80.226 (talk • contribs)


 * Considering she has **DAN**d' real & only dan radcliffe site** as one of her top friends, I'd doubt it's authentic. QWERTY | DVORAK 01:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, completely, but Emma has a neopets page, and a flixter, she proved it on her

neopets lookup.

Fan Mail Address
Just wondering, do you guys think we should put the fan mail address on the page? --Ewonline 00:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * No. Also, this page needs archiving. — <font color="#9370DB" face="courier new">G <font color="#FF7F00">a <font color="#9370DB" face="courier new">ry Kirk // talk! 13:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. :) <tt style="color:#161;">RadioKirk (u|t|c) </tt> 20:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Great! I would have done it myself but I was just about to leave. And I wasn't sure how much to archive. — <font color="#9370DB" face="courier new">G <font color="#FF7F00">a <font color="#9370DB" face="courier new">ry Kirk // talk! 10:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Me, either. ;) It's guesswork, really; the only real guideline is, discussions in progress stay here. :) <tt style="color:#161;">RadioKirk (u|t|c) </tt> 12:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

SyFy Genre Awards
Emma won the Best Actress/Movie for her role as Hermione and the Best Young Actor award in the SyFy Genre Awards. (http://syfyportal.com/news.php?id=2895) Should we put that under awards or is it considered insignificant? --Ewonline 20:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I took it out for the time being, as I've seen no indication that these "awards" are notable; naturally, if there's significant, citeable evidence that they are, it should go back in. :) <tt style="color:#161;">RadioKirk (u|t|c) </tt> 20:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Career/Appearance/Rita Skeeter issue
There is no reason to take Rita Skeeter's description of Hermione's physical appearance at its word. The article itself, in context, was obviously vindictive. St. Jimmy 15:39, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


 * With all respect, you're completely missing the point by treating Skeeter as an actual tabloid reporter in this world whose word is not reliable. The fact is, J. K. Rowling created Skeeter and Granger, and anything any of them says is canon, including the "unreliable" word of a fictional tabloid reporter. <tt style="color:#161;">RadioKirk (u|t|c) </tt> 17:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


 * OK...so it's canon that Skeeter said that. That doesn't make it informative.  In an earlier Skeeter column Herm. was a "stunningly pretty Muggle-born girl."  That's canon too, but are we going to put that in the article?  Are you suggesting that rl tabloid reporters are unreliable but fictional ones are not?  Sorry, the section still needs a rewrite. St. Jimmy 00:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Then, write it in; if Rowling wrote it, it's canon&mdash;and, yes, both would be relevant and informative. Just make sure it's cited. :) <tt style="color:#161;">RadioKirk (u|t|c) </tt> 03:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

left in 2001?2003?
not counting that picture source (no idea if it's real or not), most prep schools end at age 13, so 2003 sounds about right. User: amoammo

Steven Piepkorn?
There's not a single Google hit for this guy, much less linking him romantically to Emma Watson. Sounds like someone is abusing his editing privileges, doesn't it? I'm going to remove that part for now. If anyone can come up with some proof for this claim, then feel free to change it back. Jason the Delicious 03:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)