User talk:SJJTITAN

Re: Looking to expand HP on Wikipedia
Hey SJJTITAN, the biggest hindrance to getting HP articles featured on Wikipedia right now is that, since the series isn't yet complete, all articles about characters and places, etc., are incomplete. However, we'll have much work to do after July 21! (Our only featured article is actually a featured list, List of Harry Potter films cast members.) But for now, to get articles in good shape, I recommend you take a look at Lord Voldemort. That's the best example of what is called a good article (GA) on Wikipedia. Notice how the tale of Voldemort is told from a real life perspective, not an in-universe perspective. (For more on this policy, see WP:WAF.) Many articles, such as Ron Weasley, are close to becoming GAs like Voldemort, but aren't quite there. Others, like James and Lily Potter, are quite far (see how James' section starts with his birth year? that's a problem -- he wasn't born in 1958, he was "born" in 1991 when Rowling thought him up). So, before you tackle a big project like cleaning up something like Hogwarts, I'd recommend you get to know Wikipedia a bit more -- do some simple editing, learn how to reference articles, etc. Good luck, and don't hesitate to contact me again if you have questions!

BTW, please feel free to add yourself as a participant of the WP:Harry. Cheers, Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 02:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And I see, in the time it took me to write this post, you already have added yourself! Good going. --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 02:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * These refer to the number of characters added or subtracted to the article. You can easily catch a vandal if you see something like -10,000 because, unless you see an edit summary that says something like "page archiving" (when talk page posts are periodically moved to a subpage so as to keep the page length decent), you know that somebody's just removed a whole bunch of text. --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 03:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I think my tip would be to look through the history of an article and its old versions, and anything on the talk pages, before seriously attacking it. It helps to check if certain things have been in and out before, or are considered controversial. Think about the structure of the article: does a particular piece of information belong here, or there. It shouldn't be in twice over. Now, FBV may be correct in suggesting the style of description which is officially preferred, but I consider it less user friendly, so on the whole prefer in-universe description. I find the suggestion that readers don't understand that James being born in 1958 is talking about fiction is ridiculous, and something of an insult to their intelligence. Sandpiper 00:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Harry Potter roll-call
Hi there. Your username is listed on the WikiProject Harry Potter participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. Your name has therefore been moved to a "potentially inactive" list. If you still consider yourself an active WikiProject Harry Potter editor, please move your name from the Potentially inactive list to the Active Contributors list. You may also wish to add  to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. Conversely, if you do not wish to be considered a member of the WikiProject, leave your name where it is and it will be moved to the Inactive Contributors section. If you wish to make a clean break with the Project you may move your name to the Known to have left section. Many thanks.