Talk:Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore/Archive 1

"Draft:Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 3" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Draft:Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 3. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 26 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Starzoner (talk) 15:53, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

"Draft:Untitled third Fantastic Beasts film" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Draft:Untitled third Fantastic Beasts film. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 26 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Starzoner (talk) 15:56, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Page for William Nadylam
Since he is a confirmed star of the upcoming film, he deserves a wiki page! Sucker for All (talk) 17:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree with you Sucker for All. Being that it's your idea, can you write it? Nerguy (talk) 18:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I just wrote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sucker_for_All/Ashley_Strohmier and am unsure it's getting published. I currently am engaged with User:Yamla and User:Casliber trying to get my namespace access re-established. Apparently I refacted a message. I certainly have eliminated my "I didn't hear that" attitude in all beliefs Sucker for All (talk) 18:45, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

"Future" section?
Should we add info about the last 2 Fantastic Beasts films to this article, as they are in development? Red4Smash (talk) 00:09, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

I added it Red4Smash (talk) 17:21, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

"Untitled third Fantastic Beasts film (soundtrack)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Untitled third Fantastic Beasts film (soundtrack) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 12 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:50, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Too many links
A lot of links are excessive and unnecessary,like even the word "brother" links to another page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twa0726 (talk • contribs) 05:26, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Worth semi-protecting?
I've noticed there have been more than one case of random gossip online being added, particularly around the subject of Depp in support of him, with either no sourcing or unreliable ones by unregistered users. Wonder if this could be some collateral damage from the ongoing trial in Virginia so could it be worth semi-protecting this page for the next little while to stop this until that blows over? Apache287 (talk) 09:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect use of source in Critical response section
There's a part of the Critical response section that goes on about plot holes and gives 3 examples. However, I went to the source and only one of the 3 plot holes is actually mentioned there. Can someone please remove or reword this to actually reflect the source? Narananas (talk) 14:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

"Other thing that has been criticised is the plot holes in the continuity of the Wizarding World,such as Minerva McGonagall being present in the film when she is supposed to be born in 1935, Dumbledore not disarming Grindelwald and becoming the owner of the Elder Wand, the absence of Nagini and the suicide of Grindelwald when it is supposed that Voldemort kills him in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. [87]" Source 87: https://www.cbr.com/fantastic-beasts-3-plot-holes-unanswered-questions/
 * The Critical response section is supposed to be critics primarily, this nitpicking trivia disguised as audience response is poorly sourced and probably should not be included at all. -- 109.79.162.205 (talk) 03:34, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Cast list weirdness
The cast list section looks weird. It was immediately obvious that something weird and different had been done using the wiki markup. (It isn't entirely clear if the problem is too many linebreaks or the use of the block indent template.) Aside from merely looking odd, what makes this weirdness clearly incorrect is the resulting HTML markup, the source shows an entirely new list tag  creating an entirely seperate list for each and every person in the cast (instead of one list with many items in it).

Please fix the list formatting. It may be a simple matter of removing a few of the extra line breaks (directly before each block indent tag) or it may require further changes. If in doubt please look at what the previous films in the series and see how their cast lists are formatted, as they are not making this mistake.

If you want to dig deeper into how lists work please see Help:List (and the reason why it is important to do things properly because otherwise we risk create unnecessary accessibility hurdles and screwing things up for screenreaders without realizing it). -- 109.78.196.88 (talk) 15:18, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Not sure when but someone fixed it, so thanks. -- 109.79.162.205 (talk) 03:36, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2022
201.188.156.108 (talk) 22:19, 22 May 2022 (UTC) Main cast is this; Eddie Redmayne, Jude Law, Ezra Miller, Dan Fogler, Alison Sudol, William Nadylam, Callum Turner, Jessica Williams, Victoria Yeates, Poppy Corby-Tuech, Fiona Glascott, Katherine Waterston, Maria Fernanda Cândido, Richard Coyle, Oliver Masucci, Aleksandr Kuznetsov, Mads Mikkelsen, see this source


 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — python coder (talk &#124; contribs) 06:59, 23 May 2022 (UTC)


 * In "Starring" put the main cast, is incomplete 201.188.133.205 (talk) 02:14, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

How long is it
How long is it 2A02:C7F:1853:4100:F495:2AB:396A:A7D1 (talk) 19:31, 8 April 2022 (UTC)


 * 142 minutes Whiteguru (talk) 00:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * You'd think this would be a simple question to answer but unfortunately it is not. IFCO (the Irish film censor) says the film was 142 minutes, specifically 142' 29". Confusingly BBFC (British Film censor) lists the "Approx. running minutes 136m" which is clearly incorrect, as when you look closer at the "Cinema" section of the page it lists two other runtimes "136m 0s"	and "142m 0s" I'm not sure why they list the lower runtime, but other reliable sources such as Variety.com put the runtime at 142 minutes. Someone will almost inevitably be confused by the different runtimes, and the Home media release may have yet another different runtime to add to the confusion, but as was previously stated the runtime is 142 minutes. -- 109.76.140.170 (talk) 19:34, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Consensus on infobox "starring" list. Perhaps restore a stable revision?
There's a dispute about whether to list the nine names in the main credits billing block on the official website (which is usual according to the infobox film template), or whether to use the website's "about" section which contains a lot more names.

Yet again, also keeps changing citation titles (headlines) for some unknown reason, despite feedback on their talk page and on the talk page of their previous IP address. I don't want to get further into an edit war to correct this.

For example :

Fantastic Beasts 3 Ignites to Soft $58 Million at International Box Office Ahead of U.S. Debut has been changed to:

"Fantastic Beasts 3" Debuts at International Box Office to $58 Million.

 Esowteric +  Talk  +  Breadcrumbs   10:53, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Here's a by the same user with a different IP, using an inaccurate edit summary while making changes to citation titles.  Esowteric +  Talk  +  Breadcrumbs   21:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Had to revert to revision 1132219494 by Decodingw to eliminate disruptive edits (change of citation titles) by before many more edits piled up. Starring list may need reverting.  Esowteric  +  Talk  +  Breadcrumbs   17:46, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Esowteric was right to revert the cast expansion in the Infobox. Sometimes less is more. Listing nine names in the Infobox seems to be most consistent with what the guidelines recommend and the fact that the MOS:INFOBOX is only supposed to summarizes key features (and the lead section is also supposed to summarize). Those additions may have been in good faith but more detail in the wrong places makes the article less helpful. -- 109.79.175.194 (talk) 12:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2023
Upload the poster with billing block https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yt2MebbhcMz8qO_rylSAWsHG4J-ssqjJ/view?usp=sharing 191.113.196.245 (talk) 05:38, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Access to the drive is blocked. —El Millo (talk) 06:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Now you can see it 191.113.196.245 (talk) 18:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: This is not the place to request image uploads, and that drive cannot be viewed as El Millo said. ~ Eejit43 ( talk ) 14:57, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

In "Starring" the list is not complete
WarnerBros website says that the main cast is this:https://www.warnerbros.com/movies/fantastic-beasts-secrets-dumbledore#about. And also Rotten Tomatoes https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fantastic_beasts_the_secrets_of_dumbledore. 190.21.177.84 (talk) 01:38, 2 May 2023 (UTC)