Talk:Romilda Vane

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Should Romilda really have her own page? I don't think so. My thought is to change Gryffindors in Harry Potter's Year to Minor Gryffindor Characters, but I don't know how. Anyone else have any ideas? --Kam Tonnes 03:01, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree completely. Dean doesn't have his own page but SHE does. ????? See my point!!Lizzie Harrison 12:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry she won't for much longer. Only Major characters should have there own page, the problem is there are so many characters and so many ways to list them that its not clear where to put a lot of characters, like should they be under 'minor teachers' or 'minor members of the order' etc. there are alot of possibilities and it still to be worked out. Personally I believe we should start at list of harry potter characters page and sort it out so that each character is listed once. Then under each group have a minor ???? type characters page for all minor characters of that type (since there are way to many for a normal minor page). The majority of characters with there own page are minor.--Dacium 08:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge required[edit]

To Minor Gryffindors, clearly she is minor character. However some people are of opionion that Minor Gryffindors is only for characters in Harry's year. Where else can she go?--Dacium 03:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you bring it up at the Minor Gryffindors talkpage. If everyone there agrees to a shift in article criteria, then she'll obviously go in there. If not, discussion as to where she can go will be required. Michaelsanders 00:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There was no discussion anywhere and another user merged after the merge suggestion was completely ignored for weeks. Perhaps you should stop stiffling people from being bold as the community reaction was non existant. As another side note: this page must be retained for the GDFL.--Dacium 22:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]