Talk:Severus Snape/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 8

Merger

We should merge the Articles Severus Snape and Half Blood Prince (character) articles.

Merge?

There is some overlapping between "role in series" and 'Half-blood Prince" sections Luckyz21 23:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Opening Picture

Is there any reason we changed the infobox picture? Frankly I'm not too keen on a pic dominated by a grossly enlarged hand.Sandpiper 23:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

It was probably changed because the current one is newer. I think I preferred the old one (I'm not sure I remember what it looked like). I'll go look around and see if it's better. John Reaves (talk) 23:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, never mind, it's been deleted. John Reaves (talk) 23:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed it had gone. It was a film shot so it could easily be put back. Fair use images get auto deleted if no one is using them. It was a similar head, though the colour was better and it was closer up, and no hand waving about in the foreground. Sandpiper 14:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

For the record, I like the new picture, and hope it stays. The former picture, though pretty enough, was of something that didn't happen in the book. (Unless the picture changed more than once: I'm thinking of the Snape-Saves-Trio-From-Lupin shot.) Preseli 15:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

On a similar note, why isn't there any pictures of Snape as portrayed in the books? I think that there should be at least one. Mbatman72 02:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

On expulsion

The Loyalty section says that, when Harry performed the Sectusempra curse on Malfoy that Snape did not expel him, however in the Chamber of Secrets doesn't it say that only the headmaster or the head of house can expel people? Pyreforge 02:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the point is about exactly who can expel someone. I imagine any master could make a case for someone to be expelled if they had done something bad enough. The point really is that Snape keeps making the threat, but it never happens. So it may sound bad, but for whatever reason it is just empty words. Sandpiper 20:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Pyreforge 00:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I thought he used Rictusempra.--76.202.220.201 10:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

As a teacher and not a headteacher, Snape would not have had the authority to expel anyone. He tried to argue for Harry's expulsion once before but was overruled by Dumbledore. So any remarks about Snape not expelling Harry are redundant. Exploding Boy 15:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Leaked plot detail from Book 7

Should leaks that Snape dies killing Voldemort be included in the article? - MSTCrow 18:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Do we have a source for this information which would meet the requirements of WP:V and WP:RS? It sounds kind of like a rumour to me. -Severa (!!!) 21:34, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, no, it's a very sketchy rumor. - MSTCrow 18:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I have barely seen it anywhere but YTMND, a joke website. The scan does not read like something written by JKR. And Snape killing Voldemort would be the worst ending ever. The "spoiler" is, undoubtedly, fake.Megaritz 03:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I found the scan on Digg. It seems fake to me due to the inconsistent use of capitalisation: "him," in reference to Voldemort, is capitalised, while "Horcrux" is not. I don't think the "Snape kills Voldemort" hoax should be any more notable for the purposes of this article than the other "Snape kills..." meme. ;) -Severa (!!!) 05:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Several users have photocopies of the book or scans. I have seen these scans and can tell you the truth about the details. Of course, I don't think they'd want spoiler details of this sort to be posted until the day of the book's release. But this specific rumor is off and not quite correct, so it shouldn't be added for that reason.

Snape's Patronus is a doe, like Lily Potter's. Whenever this page can be edited, someone can add it in.

ABOUT SNAPE'S PATRONUS

I would just like to add that there's no evidence that Snape's Patronus changed into a doe. Severus Snape, according to the memories we see in Chapter 33, was always in love with Lily, even as a boy of 10 or 11 years of age. Patronus Charm is very advance magic, he must have learned it when he was in school (even though Sirius claimed that Snape knew more curses when he arrived at school than half the kids in the seventh year).

So I think, whenever Snape learned to perform the Patronus charm, his Patronus would've always taken the form of a doe as he'd always loved Lily.

So if anyone agrees please add the change given below to Severus Snape's main page:

Snape objected to the fact that, according to Dumbledore's plan, Harry, as the last Horcrux, would have to die at Voldemort's hands. When asked by Dumbledore if he cared for Harry, Snape replied, "For him?" and conjured his Patronus, showing Dumbledore that all his years of service had been for his undying love for Lily Potter, his Patronus takes the same form as Lily Potter's did: a doe.

Brilliant... A reprise...

Someone posted a link under "Half-Blood Prince," that leads to -- you guessed it, a blog -- that apparently tells who dies in Deathly Hallows. Some guy got a hold of the book very recently and put all the information on characters who die in Deathly Hallows in his blog. What do you know -- it's a reprise of "OMG Snape kills Dumbledore!" I edited the link out to prevent massive spoilage, whether the guy was telling the truth or not. Teamrocketspy621 00:51, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Large edit needed

It is made very clear in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows that Snape was always loyal to Dumbledore, and in fact killed Dumbledore under Dumbledore's orders, as Dumbledore knew he was going to die anyway and it was a good way to show that Snape was loyal to Voldemort. Ever since he switched sides in order to protect Lily, he has always been on Dumbledore's side, and was angry that Harry would ultimately have to die. Titanium Dragon 23:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Whoever re-wrote this has done it exceptionally! I dont think that this will need to be futher edited Loopywelshemz 20:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Moved discussion on "Dumbledore's greed?" into separate section below. Mercury543210 20:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

"large edit" seems to me an understatement... The article needs to be completely redone, IMHO. dott.Piergiorgio 23:49, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Small Edit Needed - under "snape and the marauders" there's a "latter" which should be a "former".

Dumbledore's greed?

Dumbledore's greed? he was only trying to stop voldemort, i don't see how that is greedy (ReshenKusaga 22:23, 21 July 2007 (UTC))

Dubledore's greed mentions to his greed and foolishness in trying to see his dead family by the use of the resurrection stone. (Korn22x 2:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC))

But "Greed"? It sounds weird saying "due to Dumbledore's momentary greed" in the article. It was obviously a lot more complicated than basic "greed", even if Dumbledore used the term. The spirit of the incident isn't adequately described by the word "greed" here - I would go with "weakness". 70.189.213.149 23:39, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

"Greed" is not the right term here. Exploding Boy 15:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I've amended greed to 'guilt over Ariana's death'. I think that's closer to what JKR is saying.Mercury543210 20:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Hogwarts Headmasters and Headmistresses

Snape was headmaster in the 7th book.67.189.55.63 21:15, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

He's also the DADA Teacher in Book 6, and if you'll look at all the other sites of those teachers, you can see that they all have a bar at the bottom that says who precedes them and who follows them as DADA Teacher. Shouldn't Snape have the same?60.241.198.190 11:19, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

It's a moot point: succession boxes are inappropriate when writing about fiction. --EEMeltonIV 11:38, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah Thatz what my point was too.. was trying to edit the Category Pages to try n insert it there and found out that it has to be mentioned here... and since I'm a n00b I thought it better to be left in the hands of the pros.

Ah, sorry, totally missed the section header (i.e. that you were talking about cats, not the succession box I just axed). --EEMeltonIV 12:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

For refrences you can add this part Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter Twelve : Magic is Might, Page 224, US Children's Edition

tejas 12:27, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Talk page guidelines

Please sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~) after your comments. Please keep discussion here strictly to article-related matters. Off-topic and incivil remarks will be removed. Exploding Boy 15:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

For whom Severus cared

I disagree with the sentence in the "Deathly Hallows" section where it is inferred that Severus is protecting Harry because he loves him.

Snape replied, "For him?" and conjures his Patronus as proof that all of his actions were fuelled by his love for Harry. <- quote from the article prior to my changing it.

That is inherently wrong to which the Patronus summoning, that which is the same as Lily's, testifies. Also the italics show that he's stunned that Albus could get it wrong. He wasn't protected Harry because he cared for him, but rather because of his love for Lily.

I'll change this to make it more accurate as the chapter "The Prince's Tale" in the Deathly Hallows explains Severus' actions. If someone can explain to me why it should be otherwise, please comment here. Drivenapart 09:29, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

In the scene Albus is asking Severus if he cared about Harry in that memory. They are talking about a him not a her. Yes he did care about Harry because he loved Lily and that is what the scene is trying to say. There were other other memories that mentioned he loved Lily. This specific memory is showing that he cared for Harry. He cared for Harry and he loved Lily. There is a big difference than caring and the loving.Cambria.Alexis 09:57, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

• I concur that they are talking about him not her, but the italics on him and the summoning of the Patronus are Severus' way of showing it was never about Harry but always about Lily; why else would he summon the Patronus? It wasn't for anyone else's benefit other than to Dumbledore that he didn't care too much for Harry but cared deeply for Lily so much so that he adopted the same Patronus as her. Also, I think we should remove the speculation about Snape's looking into Harry's eyes - Wiki isn't the place for speculation. Drivenapart 10:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

By "the speculation about Snape's looking into Harry's eyes" do you mean the "speculation" that Snape wanted to look into Harry's eyes to see Lily's eyes for the last time? Becomes that's hardly speculation. It's about as close to being text as anything that's not stated straight out can be, and pretty much any response I've seen on the internet to that passage notes the obvious connection. What on earth else could it possibly mean? That Snape has been in love with Harry all along? john k 04:23, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: above reference to Snape whispering, "Look...at...me..." While reading DH I interpreted it quite different w/ the emphasis on the word me rather than on the word look. I believe that Snape was requesting Harry to look @ his inner self/true character via the memories he had just given him. "Look...at...me...I'm really a person worthy of respect/love." BTW Snape's last wish was fulfilled IMO as Harry later names his 2nd son after him & describes him as "probably the bravest man I ever knew." (denisebk)

Severus wouldn't have replied "for him" and "always" to the question if he didn't care for Harry. He summoned the patronus because he was saying that because of his love for Lily he cared about Harry. Severus put that memory in to show Harry that not only did he not hate him but that he cared for him. This memory was to put emphasis on the fact that he cared for Harry not why he cared for Harry. Cambria.Alexis 11:22, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

• Read again what I have said, because you have completely failed to understand what I have said. The italics on him are important if not vital to the whole scene. It shows that Severus is perturbed by the fact that Albus thought he cared for Harry hence the "For him?" quote...he then goes on to summon the Patronus, which is identical to that of Lily to show that it was her not him that he cared for; to show that he cared for Lily does not automatically show he cares for Harry, the Patronus shows us nothing except that he cared for Lily - you are stretching believability by saying otherwise. If that wasn't the case, it would make the whole of the rest of "The Prince's Tale" chapter redundant! The memory flashes that he was shown, including the scene of him reading/taking the letter, show that all his actions were to keep the memory of Lily alive not because he cared for Harry. He never liked Harry because he reminded of James, but he performed his orders from Dumbledore because it kept part of Lily alive (something of which is made mention of in The Prince's Tale chapter).

In short, the "For him?" shows Snape's disdain at Albus for thinking that he cared about Harry, when what he cared about really was Lily. I would like further people's views on this please Drivenapart 11:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

If Severus didn't care about Harry his answer would be "no" and not "always". There is no disdain for Dumbledore and if you paid attention you would notice that is says Snape is crying. I have the book on my lap right now. I know what I am saying.

I just don't think you get what JK Rowling is trying to say in that part of the story. You don't see the big picture here. She was trying to say through all of his memories that he loved Lily he cared about Harry. The reason why he cared about Harry and why protected him are not important.

Just like when Dumbledore said to Harry that 'It is our choices…that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.' and 'She may have taken you grudgingly, furiously, unwillingly, bitterly, yet still she took you'.

You simply can't see the big picture. Seriously you need to reread the memory scene. Cambria.Alexis 11:50, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

• I welcome your response, but firstly I must say I've only just re-read (in the last couple of hours) "The Prince's Tale" so it's quite fresh in my mind - having the book with you doesn't make any difference in comprehension, however. Saying that the reason why he cared and protected are not important is hugely missing the bigger picture! If he hadn't cared for Lily he would never have protected Harry, that much is patently obvious, thus the reasons for him protecting Harry are absolutely essential to the entire story, going even as far back as Philosopher's Stone - if you think that's not important it's you that has missed the bigger picture. The reason he did it all it made obvious, not only through "The Prince's Tale" but at his summoning of the Patronus. Severus did what he did because of his love for Lily - that is the bigger picture you are missing, which is why he did it all because he cared for Lily, not Harry whom he just protected. Severus' redemption is due to his love of a woman and his loyalty to her memory - you can't get any bigger picture than that. Drivenapart 12:07, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is pointless, as our perception of events doesn't matter at all. Find a citation that speaks to these concerns. Until there is such, it cannot be included in the article, as per Wikipedia policy. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 19:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

To me, Snape cared about Harry, but disliked him as well. He cared for Harry because of the fact that he loved Lily and because Harry had Lily's eyes, but he also loathed him for the fact that he was so much like his father, both in personality and appearances (and James Potter was quite the bully in his younger years, no matter how noble he might have become once he grew up).

He didn't love Harry, but he cared about him (in his own way).

However, the point of the Patronus scene is to show us that Snape had always 'loved' Lily Potter deeply.

'For him?' shouted Snape. ' 'Expecto Patronum'!' A silver doe appears. ' '[You still love Lily]' after all this time?' 'Always', said Snape.

There is absolutely no reason why "After all this time"/"Always" would refer to Harry. "After all this time you love Harry?"/"I have always loved Harry"... o... k...

Of course the scene is there to show us that even after all that time (ever since he called her a "Mudblood" and she called off their friendship), he still loved her since his Patronus had changed into a doe (or maybe it had always been one, but I believe it's more that it changed into a doe because that would've been sweeter).

So you can argue whether or not Snape loved Harry or cared for him (I believe he did), but not based on that particular scene!

I will edit out every single attempt to somehow link that scene to Snape loving Harry. Read the book. There you will find the answer. [ FallenAngelII 23:02, 25 July 2007 (GMT+1) ]

I think FallenAngelII has it about right, but would put it slightly differently. Snape is deeply ambivalent about Harry because Harry embodies Lily, and survives because of Lily's love, but he envies Harry that love, just as he envied James (as well as hating him for his abuses), and the ambivalence about Harry is deepened by the fact that he so resembles James "except for the eyes." Some considerable inverted Freudianism here. On Snape's break from Voldemort, it may finally be precipitated by learning that Voldemort has chosen Harry as the target for preventing the prophecy, as suggested, but I think it begins earlier, when he realizes that his falling in for the Death Eater ideology has cost him the more filial love Lily had for him after he calls her Mudblood. Could his identification of himself as "half-blood" (apparently in 6th year, by the textbook) represent part of that break? Identifying more with Lily? Contrast to the relation of Harry to Hermione is of a little interest here. Blaming himself for losing Lily's friendship I think also think points to another answer to the question "For whom does Snape care?", to wit, not himself. Dumbledore's comment that he sometimes thinks "we sort too soon" implies that Snape after adolescence is not a Slytherin at heart, directed in the first instance by self-interest and self-love, but shows the qualities of a Gryffindor (echoed by Harry's calling him the bravest man he ever knew). But self-hatred, of which I think Snape feels a great deal and may be the emotion he needs to badly to control, is not quite the same as selflessness of moral ideal. Finally, I think there is a comparison to be drawn between Snape and Petunia, in their ambivalence toward Harry and its ties to not being able to have or share something with Lily that they would wish to. In the clear protections (and bypassed opportunities to hurt in fundamentally threatening ways) that both offer Harry across the books, we see that Lily's love for Harry protects him not only in the instance of Voldemort's curse, but by extension to Petunia and Snape continuing to act out of their loves for Lily. Chris Lowe 09:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Now, then: I think Snape showed he loved Lily, not Harry, as demonstrated by the italics, patronus, and tears. I also think Snape hated Harry, not because Harry was James's son and James did horrible stuff to him (as many seem to think, and might be part of it), but because Harry was James's son, not Snape's. Thoughts?

—Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 21:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Wait, wasn't Dumbledore the one who had tears in his eyes after Snape's patronus bounded away? —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 15:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Snape Loves Lily, NOT Harry. Go read the memory section of Snape's return to #12. He takes the photograph of Lily and Harry (with James's foot in it) and tears off the part with Lily, leaving James and Harry on the floor. If he loved Harry he would have taken the whole thing. Add this to the bit about the doe which clearly also refers to Lily. Snapes "always" comment to me indicates not only has he always loved her, but his patronus has always been a doe. It is Lily who forms the center of any of his happy thoughts (so it seems) and she who was always his protector at school. The doe is his spiritual protector and always has been.

This entire conversation belongs in a fan forum, not an article discussion page. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

James or Harry?

I don't remember whether Sirius mistook Harry for James in OthP, as it happened in the film. Did it happen? It would seem a notable slip. Comments? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 19:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I remember it, when they're dueling together in the Department of Mysteries. It happens in the movie. --VorangorTheDemon 07:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I was asking as to whether it occurs in the book as well. If it doesn't, its a notable difference betwixt the film and book. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 09:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't happen in the book, I was surprised that it was included in the film. Though Mrs. Weasley and Hermoine make a few references to the fact that Sirius seems to confuse Harry with James, it's never factually states that was the case. In the fighting scene in the book Sirius is very clear that he's talking to Harry. 68.43.205.143 03:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Spoliers in Infobox

I have (again) removed spoliers from the character info box. ... Deathly Hallows was only released very recently, and it is not until then that it is revealed that Snape was on the side of the angels all along. It will become appropriate to have this information in the info box, but it is not yet. GideonF 12:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Gideon, what specific style policy or guideline are you citing in regards to removing spoilers? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 09:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:IAR. The information is in the article for anyone who wants to find out, but the first thing someone sees when looking at the page shouldn't be a spoiler for the latest book.GideonF 12:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I guess I can understand and support that for a month or so. Maybe you can keep an eye on it, too, and when the time feels right, go ahead and move it back. Seem fair? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

That's fine by me.GideonF 22:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Half-Blood Prince (character)

There is an active proposal to delete the article Half-Blood Prince (character). That article largely duplicates information from both this article and from Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. Marc Shepherd 22:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

(Case for the ammendation of a few)See also(s)

• Judas
• The Gospel of Judas
• The Last Temptation of Christ

No. Faithlessthewonderboy 01:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Why no?

It's not relevant to this article, especially since Snape didn't betray anyone. And please sign your name.Nightscream 19:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

You misunderstand. I had deliberately included those literary traditions of Judas (viz. Kazantzakis' and those of the Gnostic provenance from which it is derived) to signify that knowing sort of betrayal which is not and never will be. I can hardly see why a very old and established literary antecedence strains relevance.

The name

All that talk on the origin of the name is nice..but has anyone realized that Severus Snape is an anagram for Persues [sic] Evans? I think that should be mentioned, and thus I shall. --User:Cao_Wei 05:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I added that. I think it's technically called a blanagram seeing as it is only a partial anagram. Don't delete it off without discussing first! I admit I might have put it in the wrong section (Deathly Hallows) --User:lsennosuke

Well, someone keeps deleting it. I think it's worth mentioning, but.. --Cao Wei 21:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

And it should be removed. Until we have a reliable, verifiable source that notes the anagram, we cannot include it, as it is OUR connection that we are making, and that connection cannot be used in an WP article. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 21:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Agree with Arcayne, there's no proof that it is intended as an anagram of that. It can't be added until someone finds evidence. --VorangorTheDemon 00:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I know it was on Mugglenet. Are they a reliable source? --Cao Wei 04:13, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Mugglenet is a fansite. Anything they could've said about it would've been fan speculation. A reliable source means either J. K. Rowling's mouth herself or a reliable news source saying J. K. Rowling said it. --FallenAngelII

He got it in one try. If folk are curious as to what constitutes a reliable source, check Reliable Sources, Attribution, Verifiability and lastly, Notability. These are the policies and guidelines that will make it easier to understand what is an is not acceptable to WP. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:14, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Fine. But isn't it at least worth mentioning, given the fact that Snape DID pursue Lily? If we mention that this was never officially noted, shouldn't it at least give people something to think about? --Cao Wei 03:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

You said it yourself: Snape pursued her, he didn't persue her. I can't believe this is being discussed. Another anagram is Evans Perseus. I know this doesn't make any sense and isn't even spelled correctly, but surely it's worth discussing! Faithlessthewonderboy 08:27, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

If you mean discussing where to find a reliable source for the use of anagrams in the series, then discuss away. As WP is not a fan forum, anything outside of the realm of what can be cited is pretty much a waste of bandwidth. Sorry for bringing the Wifflebat of Harsh, but that's the truth of it. If it has never been officially noted, then, no, we cannot mention it.

I've said it before,a nd apparently, some folk are having trouble understanding it. Nothing in Wikipedia can be included without citation, the only exception being an objective summarizing of the plot (it becomes objective by many editors and contributors agreeing as to what happened in the book - not what they guessed, but what happened). This is one of the Five Pillars of WP. Our opinion counts for squat. I repeat, it counts for squat. What anagrams have come up in a fan forum don't get included. What might have happened to Umbridge doesn't get included. What color of lipstick Harry should wear before going off to fight Voldamort doesn't matter. The difference is clear. Are people unclear as to primary sources as opposed to secondary sources? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 09:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Some folk have trouble understanding sarcasm. Faithlessthewonderboy 19:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I will strive to be a bit less esoteric in my explanations, and a bit less pointed, as well. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 19:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Upon reflection, I took the wrong tone with my first post. Sarcasm has no place on a talkpage, so I apologize for that. By the way, I very much enjoyed poking about your userpage, you've accumulated some pretty funny stuff there. Faithlessthewonderboy 04:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) I started out appropriating it from another user who had a tremendous sense of humor, and have been adding to it ever since. Thanks for the compliment. May His noodly appendage touch you, too. :D - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

DH writeup needs trimming

There is a lot of opinion and interpretation stuck into the Hallows write up. It won’t let me alter, but I think it should be trimmed down to what was actually said, rather then the interpretations of it. As it reads write now, it makes it sound as though Snape defected mere hours before Lily's death saying “upon hearing that Voldemort was heading to Godric's Hollow”, when in the book the timing was unspecified. Rather, Snape defected after learning Voldemort thought the prophecy meant Lily. We don’t know when this was in relation to their deaths or if the Potter were as yet in Godric’s Hollow at the time. Personally, I think it was quite a while before their deaths, being as how I think it was very much implied that it was Snape’s info that had sent the Potters into hiding, but again that is my interpretation.

Succession Boxes

As it has come up more than once, we should probably discuss the merits and demerits of using succession boxes in the article. Faithlessthewonderboy has pointed out that they aren't supposed to be used for this purpose. Comments? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 15:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

As you have said, I believe they aren't appropriate. The Manual of Style says, "Another common type of template, succession boxes, should not be used to describe in-universe relationships in articles about fictional entities." WP:WAF I think this is pretty clear. Faithlessthewonderboy 15:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think they belong; creating succession boxes entitled "Head of Slytherin House Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry" just invites more succession boxes of similar nonsense. All this violates WP:NOT which states 'Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information' and it is also worth noting that these boxes provide limited information anyway as most of them seem to list three or four people at most.
On an aesthetic note, if they must be kept, please change the way they are presented; at the moment the Snape's collection are quite displeasing to the eye. The One 16:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay. Let's wait a little bit to see if similarly cogent arguments appear in opposition. If not, we can remove them at the end of the day. I agree that the coloring is ugly. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:54, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore, do we know that Sluhorn immediately preceded Snape as potions professor and Head of Slytherin? I don't recall that being stated in the books, though I could be wrong. And then there's the question of the headmaster box; since McGonagall was acting headmaster after Dumbledore's death, should that be noted? And do we know for a fact that she took over after Snape was killed? IMO, not only are the boxes completely inappropriate, but we simply don't know enough to make them accurate. Faithlessthewonderboy 16:59, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

We do use succession boxes on, for instance, pages for Kings of Gondor. But in that case we have a long, consistent chain which was written up by the author himself. john k 21:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with Kings of Gondor, so I can't comment, but you bring up a good point: In this case, the verifiable line of succession is only two or three people long. It's completely unnecessary and just plain doesn't look good on the page. Faithlessthewonderboy 02:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

This is somewhat related to this topic--if you end up keeping the succession boxes, I was wondering- didn't Professor McGonagall become Hogwarts Headmistress for a very short duration after Dumbledore's death, and therefore wouldn't Snape be preceded and succeeded by McGonagall? Sorry, it's a ridiculous question, I know, and probably in the wrong place.

I already brought that up in this discussion, three posts up. I agree with you. But most importantly, the boxes have to go. They don't belong. Faithlessthewonderboy 03:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Very well...from across the genre of make-believe, the Kings and Sons of Gondor order you to make the succession boxes....BEGONE! - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 03:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC) (being all dramaticky)

Loyalty

In this section, it talks briefly about that the loyalty was questioned and then launches into the answer in Deathly Hallows. Couldn't there be more information on where he was loyal to both sides throughout the series, thus getting the discussion on? Then people's speculation on the answer and then finally the answer in Deathly Hallows? Or at least move some of the info from the sections above. Simply south 13:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Even though it was true that people didn't know until book 7, it was all speculation, and can't be added to the article. --VorangorTheDemon 20:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Did he know that Harry would survive?

Snape gets angry at Dumbledore for saying that Harry will be like a pig for the slaughter and that he used him. Therefore does Dumbledore also tell Snape that Harry will not die due to the blood links but Harry must think that he will die, and that part of the conversation was not included in the memory? Otherwise there would be no reason for Snape to continue helping him as he would know he would soon die anyway.

First, please sign your posts. Second, no, Dumbledore does not tell him about the blood link; This is why Harry himself is also initially angry at Dumbledore for executing these plans, at least until he gets to that purgatory way station, and Dumbledore then tells him about the blood link. Nightscream 18:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Third, please confine your comments to the article at hand. We are not here to interpret the plot - there are innumerable fan forums for that. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 20:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I assumed the author of the comment above was alluding to some mention of this point in the article. Nightscream 00:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Inspired by Eco?

With the name Severus being similar to the name Severinus I wonder whether some of the inspiration for Snape was taken from The Name of the Rose, especially given that Severinus was the herbalist in the Eco novel, a position much akin to be Potions Master. Velkyal 13:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, very interesting. Do you have a citation for this comparison? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 14:56, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Not so much a citation as an observation. Velkyal 09:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we cannot include observations in the article (unless they are properly cited, from notable sources). As well, the Discussion area is for discussion about the article, and not speculation. Your point is a good one; I just don't want things to turn into a fan forum debate. That is one thing WP is certainly not supposed to be. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:08, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps we should start a new article - "Harry Potter and possible allusions to literature"? Velkyal 07:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Such an article would likely consist soley of OR, otherwise the information would be included in the appropriate article. Faithlessthewonderboy 07:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Antagonist?

I note that Snape is described as an antagonist, although technically speaking he is actually a protagonist, even though this fact is deliberately kept ambiguous until the seventh book... Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 15:53, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it is because the 7th book is rather new, and doesn't need to be spilling the beans about Snape. As well, he has been an antagonist to potter throughout the previous six books, so that he is secretly on the side of the White Hats doesn't necessarily remove him from the list of antagonists. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 17:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd call him an anti-hero or anti-villain. It seems more fitting to me. --VorangorTheDemon 20:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Within your post lies the problem, Vorangor: "seems more fitting to me". What seems one thing to you might seem quite another to someone else. I think it puts us onto a slippery slope into speculation. However, if you can find a reasonable citation that calls him an anti-hero, then its worth considering. Without it, leaving Snape as an antagonist seems prudent. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 20:27, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Well even though it's quite obvious that he is an antagonist, is there anything that states he is actually one? You find a citation for me stating that he's an antagonist. When it all boils down to it, it's opinion either way. I just find anti-hero more fitting because of the fact that Snape is later revealed to have been a hero all along, even though his actions in the series suggest otherwise (as in anti-hero). And this isn't a fan page, it's a wikipedia article. Therefor tip-toeing around the subject of him being revealed as a a hero in Book 7 should have no relevence when writing the article. It needs to report it as it is, not by what we don't want people to see.--VorangorTheDemon 20:40, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Problem solved. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 20:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Agree. Problem mostly solved, I'm probably just being picky now, but now the article looks a tad bland. I'm not entirely against keeping him as an antagonist, because come to think of it, he is an antagonist, and an antagonist isn't always evil. They simply oppose the protagonists. Sigh. Dear Lord, I don't know what to call him. He's a mix of many... :) --VorangorTheDemon 09:45, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I kinda agree with you. It is a bit bland. But by removing all the fat and dirt form the meat that is the article, we can now work at spicing it up using just the meat (and I just used up most of my cooking metaphors there - time for lunch). - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I fixed it to mention that at his introduction he was an antagonist, but his true status as protagonist or antagonsit wasn't revealed until the seventh book. I didn't state what he was though, it's probably a better thing to not spoil readers. --VorangorTheDemon 18:16, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Snape and Harry

I think that tracing some signs of sympathy and respect between the two in the last few books is important to character development. Harry sympathizes with Snape in the scene he sees between Snape and James's gang in OotP. Harry feels that the Half-Blood Prince understands him and is a brilliant friend in the book of the same name, referring to the Prince even when he has non-work related problems in the hopes of gleaning some insight. He respects the Prince's spellcasting abilities and potion making genius. And of course, in the last book Harry names one of his sons for Snape and says that he was the most courageous man that he ever knew. Harry looks like James and has his recklessness, and looks like Lily and has her loving, pure nature, but in upbringing and suffering he most mirrors Snape and can see this at the end. 64.50.201.98 16:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's neary as important as you think it is. Allow the reader to come to some conclusions for themselves. The purpose of the article - indeed all of the Harry Potter-related articles is to give an overview of the series and characters, and to identify items and such. It is not to analyze the plot or the intentions of the characters, outside what is found from literary critics, JKR, or some other notable source. That's why I want to delete any fan musing whenever I see it, coz its simply a waste of space and time and unfocused thought. This Discussion page is for discussion of the article, not whether Snape loved Lily, Harry was a commie, or whether Ron would become the next contestant on Hell's Kitchen. This isn't the palce for it. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that character development points should be highlighted in a Cliff Notes style. I'm not advocating posting on how much Snape loved Harry, since that's kind of indeterminate (though Lily is pretty darn obvious), nor on Ron in Hell's Kitchen since that has nothing to do with anything. I do think that tracing a character's development through the series including what we can glean of his attitudes is important, especially as Snape is a darn slippery character. For instance, however much he liked or disliked Harry, he advocated being severe with him to teach him real world lessons. That does say something of his philosophy of teaching. He may or may not have been extra severe with Harry because of James, the Death Eaters, Voldemort, and Lily, but he exhibits this philosphy in all of his actions. Harry chooses to see it as cruelty most often, but it is consistant. 64.50.201.98 14:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Arcayne, it IS fan musing when one fails to state that the Marauders were school bullies who started so many fights, and caused so many problems that they spent practically all of their time in detention (according to canon). As written, your edits seem to show information suppression and gloss over this and other facts and give the appearance that the Marauders were all noble heroes. According to Rowling, they were not. If one persons "musings" are to be removed, then all such from anyone else should be removed as well. In future, I will edit down to mere facts and edit out all "musings" by anyone. Brensgrrl 05:41, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Which is kinda what you should be doing, Brens. Seriously, I think its commedable that you are striving to add pertinent info to the article, but that info needs to, of course, pertinent. You will note that I reverted it because it wandered off subject, tended to bloat an overlong article, and addressed subjects outside the field of Snape (that others were busslies as a factor of Snape's personality, etc). I think you should be removing other people's musings from the article, as it makes the article better. However, seeing as you are kinda new at this editng thing in WP, I would recommend that you read reliable sources and Original Research. I am not suggesting that you are not aware of these policies for WP, but reviewing them are really important before you start deciding what is and what isn't OR.

Good luck. :) -Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Snape and the Marauders

Every article I've seen about Snape seems to be unbalanced in favor of the Marauders, especially James, making him seem like some kind of hero or noble person even though canon says otherwise. I don't think that canon facts should be eliminated or glossed over for the sake of brevity alone. The Marauders were simply school bullies, another gang at Hogwarts. Only by understanding this can one understand the character of Snape and his actions. This article needs to reflect an entirely neutral POV and state the canon facts and nothing more. As written, it does not. Brensgrrl 05:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Can you quote the passages that you feel illustrate this?Nightscream 07:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree Brensgrrl. The article needs to focus more on Snape himself. This article is very long, and kind of goes off topic when it starts talking about when Harry found out certian information about him. When Harry finds out the info about him is irrelevent to Snape. Also it explains details about the Maurders and such, it actually would fall under WP:CRUFT. --VorangorTheDemon 09:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Same here; the article should be rewritten as a normal bio, and shouldn't include summaries of the books or movies. Books/movies could be quoted as sources, and the article should only contain information about Snape, not about other characters. If there is a need to explain his relationship with other people, for example Harry, Sirius, James or others, it should be under a section labeled something like "relationship with other characters". Bjelleklang - talk Bug Me 11:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

That's an intriguing idea, Bjell. How do we let the inicdental reader know what book a certain trait or action occurred in? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, we could use either the templates on Wikipedia:WikiProject Harry Potter/Templates#Book references, or we could use {{PS}}, {{CS}}, {{HP-PA}}, {{GF}}, {{OP}}, {{HBP}} and {{DH}}. If the introduction mentions that Snape is a fictional character, it should be fairly straightforward to write the rest as a regular bio, referencing sources where needed. I'd be happy to create a first draft of it, but would like to have some more feedback before I start. Bjelleklang - talk Bug Me 21:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the article should remain as it is. I like its structure and contents as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.102.68.88 (talk • contribs) 11:35, 9 August 2007 UTC

Well, I for one disagree. The article shouldn't contain information dealing with how his background was discovered, it should be assumed that the reader is either familiar with the plotlines of the books, or intend to check the sources or Wikipedia articles. Even though he is a fictional character, there is no reason for why it shouldn't be written like any other bio, and as the article stands now it also lacks sources in many sections! Bjelleklang - talk Bug Me 13:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) Bjell, try preparing a single edit that incorporates all the info using hte format you describe. Then, self-revert that edit. It gives us all a chance to see the difference. Remember, only prepare a single edit, as someone might edit in between, which would cock edits up. You might want to use your sandbox to prepare it. Let me know when you are ready, and we'll go from there. Okay? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 23:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, but got caught up in other work.. Have rewritten some of the bio, see [1]. It obviously needs more work; additional sources, as well as more details, but I think that this would make the article less crufty, more factual and without too much of the plot. Bjelleklang - talk Bug Me 22:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Etymology of Snape

4.91.105.165 22:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)Should we put tildes on both sides of our comments? Anyway, a little research in the Merriam-Webster Unabridged Dictionary reveals that the word "snape" is a variant of "sneap," meaning to chastise or punish. I desired to point this out by editing, but apparently I aam incapable of doing so. I would request someone with an account (that is, someone less uneasy about their personal security than myself) to effect this change.4.91.105.165 22:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I am going to sidestep the entire issue of how an account with a username seriously endangers your personal security (unless you are prone to scream your name and credit card number after every post, your IP tells us far more about you than would an ID), and deal solely with your research into the meaning of Snape's name. Rowling may very well have done the same research, but until she tells us so, or a reliable source comments on it, we cannot. Your research is not includable, as WP works almost exclusively on citable references.

Hope that clarifies matters. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 04:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Section title and Snape & Lily's falling out

Arcayne, on the matter of Snape and Lily's, falling out, I reviewed Chapter 23, and indeed, Lily referenced both the epithet that Snape hurled toward her, and Snape's consorting with wannabe Death Eaters as her reasons for the breakdown of their friendship. I apologize for insisting without first reviewing the passage. I've incorporated both reasons into the article.

As for the section title, there are two types of section titles used for articles on fictional characters. The first is "Character biography" or "Fictional character biography". This title, or some variation of it, is the standard used in the articles on the Weasley twins, Dumbldore, Sirius Black, etc., as well as articles on other long-running fictional characters like Batman, Spider-Man, Superman (Kal-L), Captain Kirk, Benjamin Sisko, Brooke English, Roland Deschain, etc. The other title, which I've only seen in the Harry Potter articles, is "In the Books", which is used in the Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger, Hagrid, and Draco Malfoy articles. Either would be an appropriate section title in this article. Remus Lupin's article actually uses both. The only one I've ever seen that uses "Appearances", is the Voldemort article, but that article does not present his life in an in-universe, chronological order, and lumps his movie appearances in the same main section with his depictions in the book. Since Snape's article indeed presents his biography as such, I think it's more appropriate, and would bring it in line with the vast majority of other Harry Potter articles in particular, and fictional character articles in general. Thanks. Nightscream 06:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that you and User:Asyndeton should discuss this matter before making changes. I think he is of another opinion on this matter, and once you guys find common ground, present a coordinated idea. Sound fair? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 04:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't recall seeing anyone by that name in the History list, but if he wants to participate here, I encourage it. :-) Nightscream 14:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at his contributions; he is working some of the other Potter pages, and you might be working at odds. I'd thought I'd help avoid the eventual fender-bender. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 20:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Timing of the Unbreakable Vow?

This line of the article

"Dumbledore decides that Snape will kill him, both an act of euthanasia, as a testament of his apparent loyalty to Voldemort, and as a way to fulfill the Unbreakable Vow."

implies that Snape did not know that Dumbledore wanted Snape to kill him. However, the timing of Dumbledore's request and the Unbreakable Vow are not clear in the books. Both events happen in the summer well before school starts (since Dumbledore already has the wound when he picks up Harry, and since Snape is at Spinner's End when he gets the visit from Narcissa). In my reading of the Spinner's End chapter in the book, Snape knew Dumbledore's wish and made a mental calculation that that was probably what Draco was assigned to do.

In anycase, the timing of events is not clear, so that line "as a way to fulfill the Unbreakable Vow" should be changed.

168.103.162.222 17:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Though the timing is not made explicit, I think you are right. We are to surmise that Snape swears the Unbreakable Vow after agreeing to help Dumbledore and prevent Malfoy from committing the murder. I've changed the text a bit there. Magidin 18:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Snape, revisited

I think another re-write is called for, as I edited the article as it was, and not conforming it to some of the since-GA-level articles of Hermione Granger and Lord Voldemort. A question had come up as to berb tense, and I had learned (or rather, had forgotten) that if constructed as a biography (as Snape's article is), the past tense would be utilized. this is incorrect. As Granger's and Voldie's articles are constructed, they are re-telling the matter in the forms that follow the books, and utilize the infinitive present tense.

Now, before people fall asleep from the grammar lesson, I think that i could use a hand to restructure the article more in line with the aforementioned GA-article styles.

Lastly, I am kinda concerned by this edit regarding Potter's training with Snape with Occlumency (or whatever), which has gone backand forth a bit. My knowledge of the event is admittedly imperfect, but was the Pensieve even part of the training? As well, was Harry "doing something he wasn't supposed to" when he picked up one of Snape's memories? I don't want to edit it back to what I think, until I've talked to you folks about it. Your input would be helpful. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 14:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I've responded to the part about the Pensieve on Arcayne's Talk Page. Nightscream 16:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep, he sure did, and it turns out I was wrong. Thanks for setting me straight and being a good joe about it. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)