User talk:Chazz

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

Just a place-holder in case someone wants to say something to me... Chazz 07:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

In case anyone is wondering – I have slowed down on my work here because RL responsibilities increased as the school year started. But I am still trying to contribute, in and around my other committments. Chazz 01:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't keep archives; this is talk, it is by its nature ephemeral. Of course, if you want to see what was on here that I have taken away, there is always the history... Chazz 01:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Bot Request

Sounds like an easy-enough task. I'll have some time tomorrow to play with it. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 23:47, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] narnia

thanks dad.ChazzJr ^ello! 17:10, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Welcome back

Thanks. :-) I'll try to stick around, but can't really promise, since I know how my so-called schedule is totally erratic and unpredictable. :">

Anyway, what's new? Besides your impressive updates on the Character pages, and the Narnia setup for Jr? ;-) I mean, is some particular task in need of fresh workforce? Didn't notice any explicit TODOs yet (perhaps i missed them), so i just started with tweaking what i came over... -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 19:50, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again. I wondered how soon you'd notice and how you'd greet me this time. ;-) It's good to be back, and i look forward to perfecting the MG and maybe the Chronicles too. -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 16:12, 4 August 2009 (UTC) PS I can't remember for the life of me how i got to create that "Classes" page... :-) Perhaps i trans-wikied from 'pedia... :-?? Or perhaps i wanted to collect together scattered information.

[edit] Re: narnia

okay dad, i will be working on edmund for a little bit. ChazzJr ^ello! 23:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

No need for thanks, Chazz, it was my pleasure. I always prefer fixing and/or improving a good-enough piece, rather than creating a literary work from scratch. (The laptop keyboard issues are perfectly understandable, i've worked on those too and agree that it's awkward.)

As for the context of the Narnia book, i had a rough idea. And am willing to help Junior as much as i can. Unfortunately, though, i've only read about three of the books so far, so can't add much new content. But i'll just keep an eye on things and hope they'll improve over time. -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 14:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Shacks

Wow, I can't believe we hadn't caught that before. I don't think there's a need to be so formal with merging, just tell me which one you'd like deleted and I'll take care of it. -withinfocus 00:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Damn, i missed the opportunity to argue for keeping as redirect instead of deleting. :-< ;-)) -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 16:14, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Print

I undid his change. The main issue is that our book is just too large for any tool to process it. Maybe in the future that can get going again. -withinfocus 01:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Typo

Thanks! :-D --Swift (talk) 05:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem... I guess I'm just the son of an editor. Chazz (talk) 05:19, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Give my best to your editor parent. ;-) --Swift (talk) 07:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Lily

I'm not sure if it's that noticeable. All the loyalty sections of the template have some possibility for spoilers so maybe we should cut it out for the more important characters. Let's say that if the character is introduced before their loyalty or some other basic fact is mentioned, we'll leave that out of the character template and only expose it later down in the more advanced areas. Make sense? -withinfocus 22:43, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter

Sorry about not seeing that the links on the tables of contents need to be absolute for your PDF conversion tool. I'm surprised to see that whatever tool is being used cannot account for relative HTML links, but I undid the shortening of the links. I'm trying to clean up the categories for the book so all 900 pages aren't all in the same category, which you may have noticed. Considering that it's just a back-end thing I'm hoping it won't cause any waves.

Have you thought about using {{Displaytitle}} to place the title of chapters at the top rather than having a subsection down below devoted just to them? For instance, {{displaytitle|title=The Worst Birthday|tab=Chapter 1}} would make the title "The Worst Birthday" instead of "Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Books/Chamber of Secrets/Chapter 1" and the tab for the page at the top would say "chapter 1" rather than "module". The small links to Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter, Books, and Chamber of Secrets would still be there to show the path. Then the section below detailing the title would be unnecessary. If you're interested, I could certainly help implement it while I do category filing. Otherwise, no big deal. Just a thought. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 05:15, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, my idea was subcategories of the book's category, as in Category:Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book. The pages could be categorized in both "Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter" and, say, "Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Books/Philosopher's Stone" which would allow you to see every page in the main category but permit browsing by type using the subcategories. Good thing I asked before going through the whole book, though. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 16:10, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you're arguing about the categories; in fact, I think we're on the same page. Making sure that pages retain the base category of Category:Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter is exactly what I was proposing in the above paragraph as a way to satisfy your concerns and also offer multiple ways to browse the book via the category. I've added that base category back on the pages that I removed it.

Now, as for changing the display title on Philospher's Stone chapters as a test, would there be a way for me to test whether that would screw anything up with PDF creation? I didn't see a reference to what tool you use at Talk:Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter in order to test it myself. Unless you'd like me to just go ahead and add the {{Displaytitle}} template on those chapters and you'll test it. But I don't want to be a burden and cause extra work for you and would rather not go forward if it's going to be a lot of trouble on your part. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 17:14, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

You were wanting the chapter and title to show up for printing. I notice that there isn't anything at Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Print version, so I altered the code at Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Books/Philosopher's Stone/Chapter 1 to do some clever things to show you what could be done. It now only changes the display title when you view the page directly, and when the page is transcluded, such as it would be on that print version page, it adds a level one heading with the book, chapter number, and chapter title. You can see the effect in action by comparing the page at the link above with the one at User:Adrignola/Sandbox. --Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 02:10, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I've created a print version of the pages that were modified for Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone here and placed a notice here. The same thing could be done for the other books. Other print versions could be made for characters, places, major events, and magic. The use of several keeps the size down for each one. Finally, on the main book's page, a link could be placed to an all-encompassing print version transcluding the 11 already proposed with the addition of the timeline page, residing at the standard Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Print version. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 18:50, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Displaytitle

What benefits does displaytitle add? I don't see any at first glance. We could do what you propose however and see how it turns out. -withinfocus 13:32, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

{{displaytitle}} allows different text to be shown at the top rather than the slash path to the page (which does still show up in the browser address bar and in the <title> attribute of the page. If you were looking at the browser's title, indeed, there is no benefit evident because that does not change. It's the level one heading inside the browser window at the top of the page that is altered. It's not entirely aesthetic, as it does allow one to forgo writing out the chapter title inside the first section of the page. My most recent change to the page added code to make the chapter title and the book title appear for the print version, which would need them for a medium that does not show a path to a page in a browser since it's on paper, and which only has one level one heading that would be affected by displaytitle. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 16:05, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

We can always have a bot blast through all this too. -withinfocus 00:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

We can... but it would be best to try it on a few sample pages and make sure it prints clean before we go hog wild. Chazz (talk) 01:06, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Timeline

I wouldn't think so, not really enough content there to make a large and separate section. -withinfocus 01:24, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Gotcha now. My only concern would be that stretching it to 1890 might make the events at the very end a little too squished, but adding those could definitely help the reader understand the greater picture of those early events and would be quite helpful. -withinfocus 18:34, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Cool, looks good. Not overly wide at all. -withinfocus 14:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Walburga Black

Thank you for editing Walburga Black. --93.138.127.103 (talk) 10:40, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem -- I'm trying to keep the Guide up to standard, and there was some stuff there that could use a little help. I did have to take some stuff off; we don't know that Walburga was ordering Kreacher to keep stuff, and in fact were given the impression that it was more private enterprise, keeping it for himself as Sirius was trying to throw it out.

Have you considered getting a free Wikibooks account? If you have a name, all your edits stay under that name, and it's easier to keep an eye on what you have done. Chazz (talk) 14:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Can you check Orion Black?--93.136.155.99 (talk) 15:50, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid that the only fact we have about Orion is that he was Walburga's husband; we don't know who put the protective spells on the house, that was quite likely done hundreds of years before, and we have no idea how he felt about things... given Walburga's force of personality, I see him, actually, as being rather subdued. But because we know so little about him, I really don't think we should have a page for him...

As I suggested before, have you considered getting a free Wikibooks account? You came in this time from a different IP address; if you have an account, it will keep all your edits together. Chazz (talk) 16:49, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

But we know who protected the house. That was Orion, 'cause Sirius said in chapter The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black that his father protected the house when he lived there.--93.136.155.99 (talk) 07:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I feel like the Orion page is rather useless but that is true for many of the extremely minor characters in the books yet like you said we have a page for them. Someone will always want to come into the book and add a missing character so although I don't think they provide much value I'd rather keep them so that we can have them all with a standard look-and-feel. This keeps away the thing that hurt us when the book first came out which was that we didn't have essentially "100% coverage" and anonymous users or other poor editors came in and added garbage. This looks satisfactory and leaves room for improvement if anyone down the line wants to add something. That's my opinion at least. -withinfocus 21:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Featured Book

Hey, I just saw the notice that Muggles' Guide is now a featured Wiki book! I'm absolutely thrilled. I'm still working on improving it, but I think after all our hard work, this was definitely deserved. PNW Raven (talk) 01:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Jumping off dragon

I will carefuly reread the section about Harry and Hermione jumping out the window. I thought Hermione Disapparated them as they were leaping, which is what got me to wondering why they couldn't do the same from the dragon, although that would probably be beyond Ron's ability. However, you may very well be correct, although jumping from a second-story window onto the ground uninjured and then Disapparating would certainly be quite a feat! Anyway, I want this to be as accurate as possible, and I'll edit it accordingly. If it does not say one way or the other with certainty just how and when they Disapparated, then I'll take it out. PNW Raven (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I never actually left; just one of my periodic short breaks to work on a few other projects (and lots going on in the "real" world, too), and it gives me a chance to become "refreshed" with Harry again. Anyway, I think I'll just remove my last edit as it's too ambiguous as to whether they could have done this or not. If I find something later that says otherwise, then I'll add back and let you know. PNW Raven (talk) 15:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Magic/Classes

This is an interesting page, but it's not linked to by the book. Do you not want it? If so, then please place {{delete|reasoning}} on it. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 18:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't know it was there. Looks like JokesFree4Me wrote it before book 7 came out, and didn't link it in correctly. I'll rename it and get it into the book, and bring it up to date. Chazz (talk) 19:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Muggles' Guide

Ah, i see what you mean about the index. However, i don't think it's really absolutely necessary to "fix" all the links. I mean, most of the stuff is obviously either a "place", or a "character", etc, so i believe only book chapters really need DAB'ing.

Secondly, i have some feedback on the "Why did Harry not die?" section at Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Books/Deathly Hallows/Analysis. Should i write it here or at that module's discussion page? -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 17:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Thirdly, you just added "and the fact that the artifact retrieved at the end of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is a locket does indicate that Slytherin's locket likely is a Horcrux." Did you mean perhaps "at the end of the Half-Blood Prince is a locket (even if fake)"? -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 15:27, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

That third one is certainly an error. Now fixed. Chazz (talk) 15:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Oops, sorry that i missed the semi-colon there. :"> Thing is, the dot was so close to the letter before it that it didn't stand out much ("r;") - if there would've been a full stop instead (forcing a capitalized letter on the following "From") and/or no comma between the range (2-5) and Draco, perhaps i would've understood it better. -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 13:14, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Not to worry; when I wrote that, aeons ago, I thought it looked more elegant that way, but a lot of people have "corrected" it the same way you did. In this case, clearly clarity trumps elegance. Chazz (talk) 18:29, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Contents was very helpful in developing a collection of pages for all the Harry Potter books. I was able to easily copy and paste the links into the collection. This collection can be turned into a PDF on-demand by loading it and selecting the option to download the PDF. This works better than manually regenerating the PDF every time a page is edited. Find the link to it at Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Books. I won't make a print version for all the books combined because it would take too long to load in the browser. The PDF version generated from the collection can be printed, so there's no need for a redundant print version page. I did, however, create print versions for the Harry Potter books individually for those interested in just one at a time and also implemented a simpler and more concise template on each of the book chapters for formatting both the print version of the page itself or the combined print version. Find links to them on each of the books' introductory pages. I may extend this system to the other parts of the book. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 03:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

It certainly looks workable this way, and I agree that a PDF of the entire book would be extremely unwieldy. I would suggest that, there being several hundred characters, it might be annoyingly difficult to create headers for the character pages, and it might be reasonable to suggest that a bot should be invoked to do it. I will mention that I am toying with the idea of reworking the Contents page, making it into what it is advertised to be (the intro page says that it is meant to be the place to start, to give some idea of the structure of the book). The contents of the current Contents page would them move to Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/All pages, which currently has a transclusion of the Contents page. Chazz (talk) 18:29, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] alternatives to single Program Counter

Microprocessor Design/Instruction Set Architectures mentions "there are processor architectures, for instance the CDP1802, that do not have a single Program Counter" [1]

The Wikipedia: RCA 1802 certainly proves it is not *necessary* to have a special PC register separated from the other registers. What other processor architectures do not have a single Program Counter?

(Feel free to move this discussion to Talk:Microprocessor Design/Instruction Set Architectures if you think that is a more appropriate place).

--DavidCary (talk) 04:29, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Moved; this conversation fits better there. Chazz (talk) 06:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Goblet of Fire Edits

Yes, I'm back! Well, I never actually left, but the past few months have been stressful and chaotic. I was entangled in a lawsuit (I was doing the suing) and an out-of-court settlement has been reached. Now that this is behind me, I can focus on more enjoyable things--like painting and Harry Potter. I didn't realize you were still working on Goblet. I can hold off on revisions if you're still working on it. I haven't even touched Books 1 or 2 yet, so I can always work on those and there's more to do on Half-Blood, too. I do tend to jump around a bit, but when I'm working on one book, it makes me think of something in another, then I get going on that . . . PNW Raven (talk) 15:51, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Your father was a scientist? What a "surprise"--NOT! That's obviously where you get your academic writing style. I've always assumed you were a college professor in your former life or some other academic type. Nothing wrong with writing academically, but it is usually heavily detailed-oriented. That's where the technical writer comes in--streamlining information for the general reader. I'm far less detail-oriented. We're a match made in heaven. ;-)PNW Raven (talk) 18:15, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Contact

Hi Chazz,

I would like to get in touch with the writer of the profound analyses of each of the chapters of the Harry Potter-books (is it you?), because he has answered some questions very well, questions of which the answers are not so obvious as they might seem at first sight. I would like to discuss with him some more questions that he didn't treat, and make some remarks about solutions he has proposed. I hope you can help me. Kind regards, and thanking you in advance, Thomas den Haan

Thomas, as you did not sign up for an account, I cannot easily leave a response on your talk page – your talk page is associated with an IP address, and IP addresses can change, so you quite possibly would never get it.

The analyses were almost entirely written either by myself or PNW Raven, though a user who is no longer contributing wrote the core of the series overview analysis. Because it was a joint effort, any discussion about those should appear in a place where all contributors can join in. Perhaps a good starting place is here on my talk page; we can then move individual questions to the specific chapter sections where they belong — discussion regarding a chapter belongs in that chapter's write-up, no? ~~For more private information, there is an "Email me" link on my user page.~~ Actually, that seems to have gone away... but if you do need to email me, let me know and I'll post an email address. Chazz (talk) 17:40, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Chazz,

I have created an account now, so that problem is fixed. I'm glad you could help me. I would like to repeat that your analyses have enormously helped me, for instance on the question why Voldemort could die, while he was tied to Harry by blood.

I would like to raise some new questions and discuss some you already have asked yourselfs:

First of all, what is the reason for Dumbledore to trust Snape? At first reading it seems that he did so because he saw Snape's regret after Lily Evans' death. But strictly speaking, it could have been that Snape's love for Lily had faded over the years, and that he would really have turned to Voldemort again. Until the scene with the doe in Dumbledore's room (which took place in the sixth year), we don't know of any clue that Dumbledore could have gotten which unarguable would have proven that Snape was still loyal after fifteen years. Dumbledore even seems rather surprised that Snape is still in love with Lily ("After all those years?"). That suggests that meanwhile he had other reasons to trust Snape. Or he had evidence on Snape's loyalty that we don't have. Or I haven't understood it right.

Secondly, Snape tells Bellatrix in book 6 that his information led to the death of Emmeline Vance. She was a member of the Order. I assume that Snape discusses with Dumbledore the information he will give to Voldemort. He also says in The Prince's Tale that he has only let those people die that he could not save. That suggests that Dumbledore and Snape were somehow forced to give Voldermort information on Vance, and that they could not prevent her death. I cannot imagine they would have let her die, but it also seems unlikely that she willingly would have died (she fought fiercely). Why did she die? Was it an unforeseen event?

Thirdly, how did Snape (and maybe Dumbledore) know the date of Harry's departure from the Dursleys?

Fourthly, Dumbledore tells Snape that he has to tell Harry to get himself killed when Voldermort no longer sends his snake out. This suggests that Dumbledore knew for sure that Voldemort would find out about Harry's quest on the Horcruxes, for that's why Voldemort protects his snake. But how could Dumbledore have known? It was only because they had to go to the bank that Voldemort came to know it, and Dumbledore didn't know there would be a Horcrux in the bank. It could have been Voldemort never found out, never would have protected his snake and then Snape never would have told Harry. It could also have been that the snake was killed earlier, before the other Horcruxes. He could have been killed at Bathilda's place. How did Dumbledore know?

And what is Dumbledore's serious injury that Snape is talking about early in book 6 (to Bellatrix and Narcissa)? Does he want them to believe that his wounded hand was caused by Voldemort? But wouldn't Voldemort know if he had injured Dumbledore? Or is this another injury that has healed again?

Well, these are some of my thoughts. I hope I made them clear. I look forward to yours!

Thomas, I'll answer here, but these are good points, and I'll very shortly put them in the analysis of the page they belong on.

Why does Dumbledore continue to trust Snape? Once Dumbledore grants someone his trust, he doesn't revoke it lightly. We see evidence that Snape is quite frequently in Dumbledore's company, both in the memories of the Prince and in Harry's direct experience. And while it is never said outright, we believe that Dumbledore has some ability at Legilimency. Dumbledore clearly expected Snape's love for Lily to fade, as shown by his reaction to Snape's Patronus; however, he would not expect Snape's loyalty to fall away, and back towards Voldemort, until Voldemort returned. It is quite possible that Dumbledore had inspected Snape quite thoroughly after the end of GoF, but we would not see that in the Prince's memories, because that would have been one of the more humiliating experiences in Snape's recent life, and would not have been germane to Harry in any event. (To be added to Snape's character page, and possibly Dumbledore's)

Snape's information leading to the death of Emmeline Vance: yes, Dumbledore is not only aware of the information that goes to Voldemort through Snape, in the Prince's memories we see that Dumbledore is actually demanding that Snape give potentially harmful information to Voldemort. I expect that Vance's death was not preventable, that Voldemort had already set his sights on her, but Snape had provided some small piece of information that had helped. And I suspect that Snape and Dumbledore had also provided Vance with the information that would allow her to fight back; I suspect that she had agreed, if in the battle she would have a chance to take some Death Eaters with her. I expect that, in fact, she did, and that the retreating Death Eaters had carried away and probably concealed their dead. (Analysis of first or second chapter of HBP)

Harry's departure date almost certainly came to Snape through Mundungus Fletcher, a trusted Order member who was still occasionally communicating with Snape, as we see in the Prince's memories. (Greater picture of first chapter of DH)

Dumbledore's prediction that Nagini would be the last Horcrux extant is definitely a weak point. We can be sure that somehow, Voldemort will eventually discover that his Horcruxes are being hunted down and destroyed; he already knows that the diary was destroyed, having learned that from Lucius Malfoy, and will have guessed that Dumbledore knows it to have been a Horcrux. Yes, this time it was only after the incursion into Gringotts that Voldemort found out. Dumbledore would, however, have expected that Voldemort would not put Nagini into such a directly dangerous position as fighting Harry and Hermione directly, and would have been quite surprised had he known of it. Nagini, after all, holds one sixth of Voldemort's immortality. We readers are less surprised, knowing that Voldemort had intended possibly half of his immortality (at that point) to act as a weapon -- the diary seems to have been the second Horcrux created. This is not a complete analysis; I'll have to think this one over a bit more. (Analysis of DH 33)

And the injury that Snape referred to is certainly Dumbledore's blackened hand, caused by the curse Voldemort left on the ring Horcrux; I don't recall that Snape said it was caused by Voldemort, so I can't answer this one completely at the moment, but will research and answer more fully either here or in the appropriate chapter of HBP.

I hope that helps. By the way, if you end your edits with four tildes, ~~~~, the Wiki software will insert your signature. Chazz (talk) 19:48, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey Chazz,

Thank you, it certainly does. It is indeed unlikely that Snape would have fallen back to Voldemort's side before his return: Dumbledore was his only protection from Azkaban. But after it, there would have been reason to check Snape. Apparently Dumbledore didn't rely on Snape's love anymore, which means he had other reasons. I agree with you on the assumption that it is likely that Dumbledore relied on his judgement of character, and that he had gotten to know Snape very well. This means Dumbledore saw that Snape had become a better person: this is confirmed by the fact that Snape doesn't like it when Hermione is called a Mudblood by Phineas Nigellus. I think that's a good solution, thank you.

On Vance I agree as well. Dumbledore would have warned and prepared her, possibly even offering to hide her, but that she wouldn't have accepted that last thing, since that would mean she couldn't fight anymore.

I forgot that if Snape could give Fletcher information, he probably could get it from him as well.

I'm looking forward to your thoughts on the snake. I still think it very unlikely.

On the injury: Snape says in chapter 1 of HPB that Dumbledore is getting old, that he has been seriously injured in the duel with the Dark Lord, because his reflexes are less sharp. Strange, not?

Again, thanks for the answers. I still have some other questions as well:

Harry is protected by his mother's sacrifice. This means Voldemort cannot hurt or even touch him. Dumbledore added that his house would be protected as well (OotP, ch. 37). But why does Dumbledore's protection fall away when Harry turns 17 (his mother's doesn't, and the two are connected)? Or why isn't Voldemort able to attack Harry's house when he has his blood in him, since he can attack Harry from then? Why don't the Death-Eaters do so? They are not hindered by that magic. But still they cannot even see the house, according to Moody (DH, ch.4).

I know this question hasn't been answered yet in your analysis on chapter 35, but I would like to raise it again. Why did Dumbledore want Snape to become the master of the Elder wand? That raises many questions. First of all, Dumbledore says he wanted Snape to become the master in chapter 35. But in chapter 36, Harry says that Dumbledore wanted to die inconquered. That seems contradictory. Did he want there to be another master, or not?

What do you think? ThomasdenHaan (talk) 19:17, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

The protection thing is really quite clear: Harry is protected by his mother's sacrifice so long as there is a place that is sheltered by his mother's blood, that he can call home. When Harry reaches 17, he becomes an adult, and is responsible for providing his own home — he's no longer able, in the eyes of Wizarding law, to call Petunia's house his own. One could wonder if Harry's own blood, being as much his mother's as Petunia's is likely to be, could thus provide his own shelter... particularly since, by that time, he owns the house at Grimmauld Place. But can he call that his home? He certainly doesn't think of it as a home until at least mid-August, once Kreacher has been turned... and apparently, the protection once broken may not be able to be restored.

The protection of Petunia's home against the Death Eaters is likely something that Dumbledore did. You may remember that in PS:1 he said something about strengthening the protection afforded Harry by Lily's sacrifice. I personally believe that what he did there was to extend the protection to cover the house as well. How he protected it against being seen by the Death Eaters I do not know; would the Fidelius charm work on Muggles? If it does, he couldn't use that as it would make the house invisible to Vernon's "friends" and the neighbors. I'll have to research that one a bit also.

As for the Elder Wand: Dumbledore knew that it would transfer its power only when the holder of the wand was defeated; he made the extremely common error of assuming defeat = murder. He knew that Snape would kill him, at that point, and believed that his wand would be entombed with him, though Snape would be its holder. What Dumbledore wanted was for the final holder of the wand to die undefeated, so that the wand would not be able to transfer its power to any new wizard; he didn't much care who that final holder was. If it was to be Snape, and the wand was in Dumbledore's tomb, nobody would challenge Snape for it because Snape would not have it. He had hoped that the final holder of the wand would be Snape for that reason. I'll have to re-check what Harry actually said in DH:36, but if in fact he said that Dumbledore had wanted to die undefeated, that comes to the same thing, except that Dumbledore, instead of Snape, would then have been the final holder of the wand. My immediate suspicion, though, is that Harry was over-simplifying things, as he rather tended to do.

I haven't yet had a chance to do my research, it has been hectic here. But stay tuned... Chazz (talk) 21:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

• reset

One note on Dumbledore's injury: The injury was received in a duel with a Horcrux, and as we saw in CoS, a Horcrux can and often does have the same abilities as the person who created it. In that light, it could be considered a duel with the Dark Lord, and the Dark Lord wouldn't know about it because his connection to his Horcruxes has become so tenuous as his soul has become tattered. More in the book chapter write-up.

But that cannot be the explanation, since Snape doesn't know anything about the Horcruxes at all. That is evident from his memories. This means that Snape wants Bellatrix and Narcissa to believe the injury is caused by the duel in the ministry - with the real Dark Lord. Apparently he and Dumbledore want to create the rumour that that's the cause of his injury, and I can only conclude that Voldemort doesn't know if he has injured Dumbledore at all, since otherwise the rumour would have been exposed.

I thought Harry was protected by his mother's sacrifice for his whole life: otherwise his mother's blood in Voldemort could not have protected him in the forest, when he was 17 already. And Dumbeldore added, that as long as he has a house where his mother's blood lived, that would be protected as well. I understand that part. But when Voldemort took Harry's blood, he could hurt Harry again. So I'd expect that he would also be able to hurt him in that house, but apparently Dumbledore's addition is not affected. But I guess we can only accept this as a fact, since an explanation lacks (and wouldn't be important either). Then the only strange thing left is that the Death-Eaters seem to be somehow affected by Dumbledore's additional charm.ThomasdenHaan (talk) 19:14, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree about Snape being unaware of Horcruxes. I don't see any mention of them in the appropriate part of the Prince's Tale, but they are not ruled out either. I'll amend the discussion page in light of that.

Voldemort was always able to hurt Harry, he was just never able to kill him... and that protection, coming from a parent, is tied to the nature of parenthood: when Harry turns 17, he no longer needs a parent, he is of age and is (magically) on his own. At least, that's how I read it. The reason for taking Harry's blood was to prevent Harry's touch from hurting Voldemort. As there was no parental connection between Harry and Voldy, the parental limitation fell out of play there, or at least that's what I would expect.

One thing also to consider, looking at the Death Eaters and their inability to see Harry's house, is the nature of agency. Riddle did not kill Myrtle directly, he had the Basilisk do it; yet we are told that he was able to create a Horcrux on the strength of that. Likewise, Voldemort seemed to feel that he did not have to kill Snape directly to gain the benefit of his murder (control of the Elder Wand), rather having Nagini do it. The latter is questionable, as Nagini, with embedded Horcrux, could be seen as a surrogate Voldy, but the Basilisk, as a separate and nominally self-aware individual (when Harry hears it in the pipes, it is planning, which is a mark of self-awareness), is an agent rather than a weapon. This leads us to the idea that magic acts on the agent and the originator similarly. Thus, being Voldemort's agents, could the Death Eaters be bound by the same spell that bound Voldemort? If they were acting independently, perhaps they could find Harry's house... but Voldy clearly doesn't like independence in his underlings. Chazz (talk) 20:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Big revision, which results in taking two clauses out of the HBP:2 write-up. Snape never says that Dumbledore's injuries are the result of a duel with the Dark Lord. What he says is: "The duel with the Dark Lord last month shook him. He has since sustained a serious injury because his reactions are slower than they once were." (Italics mine.) Two separate events... and no need for Snape to know the ring was a Horcrux. Chazz (talk) 23:47, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

O yes, I see it on the injury now. But regarding Snape and the Elder Wand, Dumbledore says at the end of the chapter King's Cross, that he knew from the moment of Voldemort's return at the graveyard that Voldemort would go after the Elder Wand. Why did he want the Elder Wand to pass on to Snape then, if he knew that Voldemort would go looking for it, and thus probably would kill Snape AND be the true master of the Elder Wand? That makes no sense.ThomasdenHaan (talk) 13:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] McLaggen or Zacharias Smith

In the version i have the one who runs off knocking about people is Zacharias Smith quoting here Harry saw Zacharias Smith bowling over first years to get to the front of the queue, here and there younger students were in tears, while older ones called desperately for friends or siblings.

You are correct. I'll move it. Chazz (talk) 07:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] U7a

Dear Chazz, ive just try to give the people to know what is going on high technology sector. No any spam or non-truth information. Alexander Kalinins Lazars son, Saint-Petersburg, Russia (talk) 09:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

i see my friend, about wired GPS some talked in '93. but about WiFi universal ID card i found just here - http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS77301+16-Apr-2009+BW20090416. i really generated it in 2004 year and i see what its starting in America now. i dont know but i was under russian special forces control, i have a political case and had chechenian friends. i have a fiancee in Europe, but the system is making me to work only 3 months for 1 employer, to live 6 months in different countries. i cannot live like this, i need to create my own family in born land.
Alexander Kalinins Lazars son, Saint-Petersburg, Russia (talk) 22:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I understand but do not see what can be done to help. The idea itself, even if you did have it back in 2004, is without value; you must somehow both develop and protect that idea at the time, and in 2004 based on what I have read, it would be too late, it would already have been patented, or at least the patent would have been applied for, by the companies that are now doing it.

On your other point: how you live and work, I can be of absolutely no assistance, and I cannot see that Wikibooks is a way towards that. I would suggest checking Google for work in your area, and for visa regulations for where you want to be. In particular, you should be able to find some information about working permits for Europe. While I would like to help, my Russian is not strong enough that I am able to help you; it would be best for you to do your own research in your native language, so there are fewer misunderstandings. Chazz (talk) 00:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

U7a

Hi again, iam sorry but i will use english. please if you see some misunderstandings, please write me and ill correct that immediatelly.
i understand you about patents, i know the rules, next time i will never generate an idea for free. it doesnt mean i think only about myself. i have a fiancee in Germany and i need money to live there. This is a main reason. Nobody knows what i can generate next time, but it will be in my mind, or ill forget once generated idea. No problem, i am a friend with myself. Somebody told me to have an exercise book to write my ideas, i say you never.
i saw one vending company in Germany, i sent them a proposition about the idea of banking machine. which will bring profits on many fronts. i dont know, i cannot write it in full version and cannot write in short, but 3 days they still didnt answer.

And they will not. Ideas that come in "over the transom", unsolicited ideas, are routinely disposed of unread for legal reasons. They will ask people to come up with ideas only if they have contracts in place with those people; otherwise there is too much chance for lawsuits.

Patents and ideas will not make you rich. My boss has a patent on a thing that he developed and is selling. I have a patent myself on a machine for use in biological science. Both of us are just about "breaking even": the money that we put in to develop the idea approximately equals the money we have gotten out of it. In order to make money from an idea, you have to develop it and market it. Big companies are good at this, because they have people who are good at coming up with ideas, other people who are good at developing, and other people who are good at marketing. And additionally, they have enough profit available so that they can put in the US$250,000 that it usually costs to bring an idea to market.

A much better plan is to take the time to figure out what you are good at, and then try to find a job in Germany where you can do that thing. And if that means taking a low-level job at, say, Siemens, then do that. Once you get into a company, you have a much better chance of being promoted within that company, into a place where you can make these ideas happen. Chazz (talk) 00:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)