J. K. Rowling is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 11, 2008. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I was travelling back to London on my own on a crowded train
The image in the section Inspiration and mother's death seems totally irrelevant. According to the text, Rowling was on a train when she was delayed, not in a station, certainly not in King's Cross Station, if that is where the photograph was taken. On her eventual arrival at KX from Manchester, she would have left the station without delay. Apuldram (talk) 18:41, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps there should be a separate paragraph in the main text, explaining the connection between Harry Potter and KX. The original image would then be more appropriate, as it shows a train, perhaps the Hogwarts Express. Apuldram (talk) 09:22, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Error in Religion Section
The Church of Scotland is a Protestant church, not Catholic. J.K.'s daughter would have been christened, not baptised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.201.172.33 (talk) 04:01, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- There's a bit of confusion there; the source says Church of Scotland, but it's very likely that it was Scottish Episopal, though we haven't found a source yet to confirm it. Serendipodous 09:32, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- There seems to be a number of sources, but difficult to find one that's authoritative. How about this? Also, JKR is listed in the Wiki category Scottish Episcopalians.
- In any case, surely protestants are baptised? Apuldram (talk) 10:21, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- I always thought so. Serendipodous 11:02, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- The Scottish Episcopal Church seems to see the two terms as synonymous. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:54, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- S. Episcopal is Anglo-Catholic rather than Protestant, whereas the Church of Scotland is Protestant. I've never heard that Protestants don't use the term "baptism"; after all, Baptists are a Protestant denomination. Serendipodous 13:43, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- The Church of Scotland uses the term baptism, see direct quote from their website here "The usual pattern for joining the Church of Scotland is that infant children of Church members are received into the Church through Baptism." The statement in section Religion of the article ("She attended a Church of Scotland congregation while writing Harry Potter and her eldest daughter, Jessica, was baptised there") is therfore correct. I think it's time to put this discussion to bed. Apuldram (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- I always thought so. Serendipodous 11:02, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
New subsection on Scottish independence issue
I have updated the Politics section and decided to create a separate subsection for the independence topic, as it has become increasingly significant in Rowling's career/public life. I will also be updating this content on related pages, such as the Better Together page. However, I am happy to collaborate on the further development of the section, as I am new to editing this page.--Soulparadox (talk) 04:52, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that it really merits a separate section from politics generally, as her support of Better Together is consistent with her already expressed political beliefs (support of the Labour Party). The "Death Eater" reference belongs more in the politics of Harry Potter article. There is a useful article on the BBC about this. Also, there is a danger of the section being a bit unbalanced now in having more material about her views regarding Scottish independence than her other views. Again, most of the content probably belongs in the politics of Harry Potter article, with only a summary in this main article. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 09:54, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
However
I have twice removed a "however" from the article. As WP:EDITORIAL says, we need to be extremely cautious in using this word and only use it where it is actually merited, or in quotes. Speaking of quotes, there are far too many such that we are well into WP:QUOTEFARM territory and I have tagged the article accordingly. --John (talk) 10:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- If you don't have the literary skill to preserve the meaning of a sentence after you alter it, don't alter it. Hacking a word out and then leaving the wreckage for others to clean up is vandalism, pure and simple. Serendipodous 10:48, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Mmm. I'm not impressed with this response, as it does not address the content issue I raised. If there are no valid objections I will restore my edit. --John (talk) 14:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- "However" is not always editorial. It is simply used in this context to connect a contrasting subordinate clause. It makes authorial claims whatsoever. Now, there are words out there, beginning with "N" and "C", for instance, that are editorial; however, I do not appreciate my use of that word being grouped alongside them.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Serendipodous (talk • contribs)
- Mmm. I'm not impressed with this response, as it does not address the content issue I raised. If there are no valid objections I will restore my edit. --John (talk) 14:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- When the "however" in section Religion was removed by John, the two sentences created by that edit no longer made any logical sense. In this context, however is a necessary qualifier, contradicting the implication that by including witchcraft in her books Rowling is promoting it. "But" would be an alternative, however I feel that "however" is better. Apuldram (talk) 15:29, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Well, at least now we are beginning to address the content issue. The authorial claim lies in the contention that there is a contrast between the clauses. If this contrast exists in the source, we could perhaps keep the wording. Does it? I'm not particularly into playing guessing games so I have no idea what the latter half of your comment means. --John (talk) 15:33, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Left-wing
Serendipodous: I included a sentence on Rowling being left-wing, and I was wondering if you had any thoughts about whether this should be expanded on and how? Some have suggested she can be identified as socialist pointing to The Casual Vacancy and her love for Jessica Mitford, however, I'm not sure how reliably this information can be referenced. Best, —JennKR | ☎ 15:17, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- I've removed it. It's hardly a surprise that a right wing commentator like Charles Moore describes her that way, but it's of no encyclopedic value to add his thoughts on the matter. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:34, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Ghmyrtle: But surely this information is relevant when she has said it of herself? Not in the source I provided, but previously in interviews. —JennKR | ☎ 15:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- I agree with its removal. It isn't something she is known for. --John (talk) 15:48, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- The sentence added by JennKR contained: "has been described as". Those are weasel words. A more complete statement, such as 'Charles Moore, a former editor of the right wing Daily Telegraph has described her as holding left wing views" immediately discloses the lack of a NPOV. Apuldram (talk) 16:14, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- I agree with its removal. It isn't something she is known for. --John (talk) 15:48, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Ghmyrtle: But surely this information is relevant when she has said it of herself? Not in the source I provided, but previously in interviews. —JennKR | ☎ 15:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
What are all of your thoughts on this, there are probably more recent examples but this is what I first came across:
- Jensen: Do the books reflect your own political sensibilities? In America, some might say you're a bit left-wing.
- Rowling: It's absolutely the reverse to the British press; I was told yesterday that I'm a Euroskeptic, which is a big buzzword in Britain. I actually woke up at 2 a.m. this morning, went into the kitchen to get some water, and thought, "I know why they said that -- they haven't finished the book." Right at the end, Dumbledore says, "Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open." That is my view. It is very inclusive, and yes, you are right: I am left-wing.