This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (film) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 90 days

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 26, 2010	Good article nominee	Not listed
May 23, 2022	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 19, 2022.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Emma Watson considered quitting the Harry Potter film series, but later returned to star in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince?

Current status: Good article

Film: British / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Novels: Harry Potter Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Harry Potter task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:29, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:13, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page formatting looks weird[edit]

82.15.100.19 (talk) 20:36, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Look at my small correction.[edit]

Is it okay? Stephenfryfan (talk) 10:05, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

apparently it wasn't[1]

generally not a good idea to make any changes to quoted text. small changes of CASE don't normally require discussion. -- 109.76.196.168 (talk) 07:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

This review is transcluded from Talk:Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (film)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Pamzeis (talk · contribs) 01:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not gonna miss the chance to review this!!! Comments will hopefully come by 27 March... Pamzeis (talk) 01:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamzeis, thanks for picking up this review! Kpddg ^(talk ^• ^contribs) 01:50, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamzeis, when will you be starting the review? Thanks, Kpddg ^(talk ^• ^contribs) 01:54, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit busier than I expected. Hopefully tomorrow, but if no comments appear by then, then it'll probably be Saturday. Pamzeis (talk) 02:07, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fine Kpddg ^(talk ^• ^contribs) 02:15, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Version reviewed

Prose

Add a comma after "best friends Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger"
- Comment: I think the sentence would be fine without a comma there?
The second and paragraphs of the lead are confusing. The second goes from production (September 2007) to release to budget and back to release; the third goes to the premiere (which happened before release), then repeats information about the release.
- Done: Re-ordered in this edit.
Third paragraph's last few sentences are also confusing: the second-last talks about its gross positions during its run, while the last talks about the positions after its run... consistency?
- Not sure. I did not understand what exactly should be done? These two sentences seem to be in order.
  - My issue is that it is confusing when one talks about how it became the eight highest-grossing film when it was in cinemas (it isn't anymore), while one talks about it after (i.e. it was... the third, I think, highest-grossing Potter film at the time of its release)
    - Done here? Provided a clarification.
score, and a fine story — remove "a fine"
- Done here
82nd Academy Awards for Best Cinematography — comma after this bit
- Done: Comma added here
chooses his son Draco Malfoy to — commas around Draco Malfoy
- Comment: Are you sure commas would be needed here?
Draco's mother Narcissa and — commas around Narcissa
- Done here
allays their suspicions by — what suspicions?
- ? Would this be fine?
  - I'll take a look during my second look
Then at the — comma after then
- Done here
and Narcissa Malfoy and follow — comma after Malfoy
- Done here
Greyback attack and destroy — comma after attack
- Comment: The sentence seems consistent without a comma.
Draco hesitates, however Snape — Draco hesitates; Snape, however,
- Done here
The bulleted cast list—other than Pettigrew—should not have full stops, as there are no full sentences
- Done here; reworded Pettigrew's sentence also so that full-stop is not needed to maintain consistency
Phoenix while Natalia — comma after Phoenix
- Done in this edit
Ron’s siblings, Fred and — no comma
- Done here
Slytherin students, Vincent — ditto
- Done here
Gryffindor students, Lavender Brown — ditto ditto
- Done here
Cormac McLaggen while — comma before while
- Done here
Ravenclaw, Marcus Belby — no comma
- Done in this edit
Any reason why McCory and Legeno are in a separate paragraph?
- Done here. Perhaps they were in different paras as they played opposite roles in the film. But a separate para for this is nevertheless not needed.
Before David Yates was officially chosen to direct the film — unneeded; we learn Yates directed it with more context later
- Comment: The next mention about Yates in this paragraph is an exerpt from an interview. Since the above phrase states that he is director, I feel that it should be kept.
approached for this one — feels clumsy
- ? Is this better?
  - I'll take a look during my second look
The quote in the second paragraph of #Development takes up, like, 90% of the paragraph. It probably should be paraphrased to avoid over quoting... and it's kinda hard to follow what Yates is saying...
- Feedback required Is this okay?
  - I'll take a look during my second look
Yates described Half-Blood Prince as being "a cross between the chills of Prisoner of Azkaban and the fantastical adventure of Goblet of Fire." — this either needs to be expanded upon or removed, because it tells us nothing...
- Comment: I don't think it can be expanded upon, but should it be removed?
  - Probably? I just feel like it's unnecessary if there's nothing else to add
Hermione.^[20]^[21]Nicholas — missing space
- Done here
recurred in all scores — what scores?
- Done: Changed 'scores' to 'films'
Also retained were — awkward wording
- Done here
Can development and casting be merged? There doesn't seem to be anything that warrants them being separate and both sections feel rather short and choppy at the moment...
- Comment: Shall I merge it under 'Development and Casting'?
  - That would be ideal (with casting uncapitalised per MOS:HEAD)
    - Done here
According to Watson's article, all three actors were hesitant to sign on for the last films, not just her. Her and Radcliffe's articles also go more in-depth into why they were hesitant, etc. Any chance that could be incorporated into this article?
- Comment: While the article does state that all three were hesitant to continue, I can't find a reliable source for them.
  - News.com.au, NY Times, Newsweek and MTV (the sources cited in Watson and Radcliffe's articles) are reliable?
  - Done [2]. Only the newsweek one seems to be working
the role but Riddle — comma after role
- Done here
Percy Weasley respectively — comma before respectively
- Done here
sets, noticeably the interior — what is noticeably supposed to mean here?
of Ireland; the only location — replace the semi-colon with a comma
- Done here
film series. ^[40]^[41]The interior — extra space, missing space?
- Done: Extra space removed here
Craig noted "Apart — either a comma, colon or "that" is needed before noted
- Done: Wording changed here
Grint did not begin until November 2007, Watson did not begin until December 2007, Rickman and Leung until January 2008, and Bonham Carter until February 2008. — can this be reworded or something? It feels kinda wrong to me
- Comment: Is this fine?
  - I will take a look during my second look

More to come...

@Pamzeis, I have made most of the changes you pointed out, but need some help on others. Could you clarify where I have some doubt? Kpddg ^(talk ^• ^contribs) 14:30, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamzeis? Kpddg ^(talk) 15:28, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamzeis, I have made most of the changes, but need clarification on some. Could you respond? Kpddg ^(talk) 13:46, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yates didn't want — informal contractions
- Done here
Half-Blood Prince is the only film in the series to be nominated for the Best Cinematography accolade ... — this can be moved to accolades
- Done here
interview with the Academy — if I wasn't familiar with film, I would have no idea who "the Academy" was
- Done here
The second paragraph of #Cinematography is, again, like, 90% quotation
- Done here
To avoid having to say it more, paragraphs with lots of quotations are not desirable. The problem is, this causes a potential copyright violation (see WP:OVERQUOTING for more info). This really needs reduction. While it's not that much from each article, it just feels excessive because a lot of paragraphs consist of mostly just quotation(s)
so we were constantly trying to figure out how not to make these dead people coming up look like zombies. A lot of it came down to their movement – they don't move fast, but they don't move really slow or groan and moan. We ended up going with a very realistic style. — why is this in first person? Also, contractions should be removed
- Comment: Because this a quotation
About Dumbledore's ring of fire — since the plot doesn't mention it, what is "Dumbledore's ring of fire"?
- Done here. Added in the plot.
sprayed propane and then lit it — I'm findin' this hard to follow... this probably needs expansion upon
- Done Made it more clear here
- Done here
finding a faster way to conjure flames. — ...did he find one? If so, what was it?
- Done Made it more clear here (reorder)
created by Double Negative — since it doesn't have an article, what is Double Negative? Some context would be appreciated
- Done linked to respective article here
Also, is there any particular reason #Visual effects is arranged this way? Plot-wise, it's a bit confusing since it goes from the inferi (second, plot-wise) to the fire (third, plot-wise) to the opening scene and pensieve (first, plot-wise)
- Done Re-ordered here
The budget section seems very short and choppy, and kind of breaks up the flow of #Production. Maybe merge it development or box office?
- Done Merged with 'Box office'
film series. ^[66] — extra space
While at the middle of the series in length — ???
- Done Bettered here
released later. ^[80]The US — extra space, missin' space
A 15-second teaser for the film was shown alongside the IMAX release of The Dark Knight. — is there anything significant about this showing specifically? I'm not familiar with how cinema was back then, but nowadays, this kind of stuff happens a lot...
- Comment: It think its because it was the first IMAX trailer?
Harry Potter marathon which — Harry Potter marathon, which
- Done here
Warner Bros and MSN ran an online Order of the Phoenix quiz, with the prize being a walk-on part in the Half-Blood Prince. — wouldn't this fit better in a production section? I don't see how it is marketing for the film...
- Done oved here
March six character — comma after March
- Done here
An English version of the international trailer — isn't it already in English? I'm confused...
- Done: Reworded here
Weekly which had — comma after Weekly
- Done
November,^[106] but was not — comma unneeded
- Done
Advance ticket sales on Fandango.com for Half-Blood Prince surpassed advance ticket sales for Transformers 2 at the same point in sale cycles. It is also in MovieTickets.com's top 25 advance sellers of all time.[107] — can this be moved to #Box office? I think it fits better there
- Done
2 hours 33 minutes and 28 — comma after hours
- Done
released on Blu-ray with a digital copy and DVD — was Blu-ray released as the digital copy and DVD or separately? Kinda ambiguous at the moment
- Done here
mini theme park which — comma after park
- Done
Florida. ^[113]Also included are deleted — can ya guess?
- Done Haha
Also included are deleted scenes comprising 8 scenes with a running length of 6 minutes and 31 seconds — a bit awkward and repetitive
- Done Reworded here
The Blu-ray and DVD released in India, the Philippines, South Africa, Czech Republic and Israel on 16 November 2009, making them the first countries to get the Half Blood Prince DVD release before the UK and the US. — firstly, this sentence is missing a "was". Secondly, the first countries? Were there more? I find this wording quite confusing. And thirdly, "Half Blood Prince" is missing a hyphen
- Done Reworded
November. ^[117]The Blu-ray — again
North America includes a digital → North America include a digital

Done here

DVD of the year with an — comma after year
- Done here
Blu-ray markets widely beating — comma after markets

Done here

Does the final paragraph of #Home media need to be separated (MOS:BODY)
- Done here
cinemas; The Twilight Saga: New Moon bested this with $26.3 million — when did this happen?
- Done Clarified here
on its way to $139.7 — on what's way?
- Done removed detailed info about prev film
office run was over on — office run finished
- Done here
until The Twilight Saga: Eclipse surpassed — when?
- Done here
this record for two years — worldwide or US?
- Done worldwide
South Africa the film opened — comma before the
- Done all copyedits in this section done here
one position grossing $789,176 — comma after position
- Done
grossing $789,176,^[133] it maintained — comma splice
- Done
week, too, with a total — can too be deleted? It makes the flow rather awkward
- Done
In Australia, as in most of the world, the film broke records with a debut of $11,492,142 and opening at number one, maintaining a second week at number one with a total of $5,278,096 (down 54%), and grossing a total of $24,208,243. — I'm finding this pretty hard to follow. It probably needs a split and a bit of a reword
- Done
from the UK tabloid Devin Faraci of Chud.com — this humorously implies that Faraci is the UK tabloid
- Done here!
best Harry Potter film → best Harry Potter film
- Done here
out of 5 stars rating — delete rating
- Done here
production design, improved acting — "improved acting" does not tell us much... in comparison to what? By all of the cast or only certain members?
- Done here
noted that the film's — the bit which follows this is an opinion, but the use of "noted" implies a fact...
- Done here
but in the second half the film finds better footing — comma after half
- Done here
and goes on to say — tense should be consistent; otherwise, it feels awkward
- Done here
largely due to the large number — a tad repetitive
- Done here
Rickman.^[147]Screen Daily commented — space after the ref
- Done here
experience ", but praised — extra space present before the quotation mark
- Done here
Margaret Pomeranz, the co-host of the television show, gave the film 3 out of 5 stars — her rating is meaningless if you don't provide further context
- Done: Removed here
At the time of its release, Rowling stated that Half-Blood Prince was her "favourite one" of the six film adaptations.^[70] Radcliffe was critical of his own performance in the film, stating in an interview in 2014 that he was "just not very good in it", and calling it "hard to watch".^[150]^[151] — since Rowling and Radcliffe are not critics, their opinions seem rather trivial
- Comment: Since they play primary roles in this series, I do not think that their opinions should be removed, but maybe moved elsewhere, if you feel so. What is your opinion?
To be completely honest, the critical response section seems rather messy. Each review is just... there... there's no apparent way of organising them and quotes are used very frequently. If you haven't read it already, WP:RECEPTION is an especially useful essay for this
- Comment: Is this better?

Sources

What makes the following sources reliable:
- JewReview.net
  - Another ref added alongside
- Showbiz Cheat Sheet
  - Done here
- Classicalexburns
  - Replaced here
- Ugo
  - Added one more alongside it
- The Writing Studio
  - Replaced
- Rick Steves
  - Replaced
- Rope of Silicon
  - Replaced
- First Showing
  - Could not find a reliable source, so removed the corresponding statement. Replaced in the other instance.
- MuggleNet – isn't that a fan site?
  - Sorry, but I'm not able to find it!
- Home Media Magazine
  - Removed one instance, but could not find any other citation for the other mention
- ScreenCrave
  - There is another citation alongside it
- Crushable
  - Removed the sentence, as no source is found
- The HD Room
  - Replaced
- Ajax World
  - Done
- IMDb
  - All instances of imdb have either been replaced, or refs added alongside
    - I'll clarify that Box Office Mojo is just owned by IMDb, it's not IMDb itself. Box Office Mojo is one of the most reliable sources for box office. —El Millo (talk) 02:51, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh ok, I did not know that. Thanks for restoring the ones I had removed. Kpddg ^(talk) 03:00, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can a more... recent source be provided for the "fastest to reach the $350 million mark in worldwide box office of all time" claim? A decade-old source is not the best for a claim that is likely to become outdated
- It is not the fastest anymore, so shall I remove it?

Other

Can the citations be moved out of the lead? None of them seem to support controversial claims that need to be updated
- Done here. All statements are sourced later in the article.
one day short of the fourth anniversary of the corresponding novel's release — is this really significant enough to be in the lede?
- Done here. I removed the sentence as I could not find a source for it.
with praise for Yates's direction, the performances, Delbonnel's cinematography, Nicholas Hooper's musical score, and a fine story — #Critical response says it was praised for its funniness, thrill, visuals and emotion...
- Comment: The critical response section has various views. But I could not find a mention of Yates's direction, so I removed that. Do you have any particular wording in mind?
  - I don't wanna impose any particular wording but my problem is, it's not explicitly stated or sourced that what's in the lede is what was praised, making it a possible violation of WP:SYNTH. The Rotten Tomatoes consensus, meanwhile, tells us what most critics think of it.
    - Done here
I'm not super fussed about this, but why do some awards have "[Number] X Awards", some "X Awards" and some [Year] X Awards"? Consistency would be appreciated
- Done here
There is a "dubious" tag on the Teen Vogue cite and others
- Done All dubious sources have been taken care of

I have added all my comments. Article is now On hold. Apologies for my delay... Please take as long as you want to resolve my comments. Pamzeis (talk) 15:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamzeis, I have responded to the points you have raised till now. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Second look

Version reviewed

written by Steve Kloves and produced by David Heyman and David — comma after Kloves
- Done
all time and 2009's second-highest-grossing film (behind Avatar). It is the fifth-highest-grossing film in the franchise — that's not- that's not my concern. My concern is that one is at the time and one is of all time.
- Done
chooses his son Draco Malfoy to carry — commas around "Draco Malfoy", because, if I recall correctly, Lucius only has one son
- Done
In Diagon Alley, they visit Fred and George Weasley's new joke shop. — this seems rather trivial...
- Done here
My concerns with overquotation and an unclear statement in the second paragraph of #Development and casting don't seem to have been resolved
- Done here
Try to avoid one-sentence paragraphs, as they feel very choppy within the text (MOS:BODY)
- Done here
Other cast members started much later: Grint did not begin until November 2007, Watson started in December 2007 — comma splice
- Done
to the cave scene Delbonnel — comma after scene
- Done
There's too much quote in the second paragraph of #Visual effects and there's at least one missing quote mark
- Done here
the Gaunts because they felt — comma after Gaunts
- Done
without it there was too — comma after it
- Done here
If the Dark Night preview was the first, it should probably be noted
- Done here
which took place 5–7 December — missing word?
- Done
Ellen claim has a cn tag
- Done
2009, at MTV Awards → 2009, at the MTV Awards
- Done
2 hours 33 minutes — comma after hours
- Done
4,468 cinemas in 2010) ; — extra space?
- Done
reach the $350 million mark in worldwide box office of all time — of all time? Wouldn't a newer film have beat it by now?
- Done here
the third most successful — hyphen between third and most?
- Done
number one → number-one (all instances when used as adjective)
- Done here
He however praised the → He, however, praised the
- Done
If you wanna keep Rowling and Radcliffe's opinions, I'd suggest creating a section called "Impact" or "Aftermath". Keep in mind that it'll have to be longer than it is now. See Total Recall (1990 film)#Legacy and Total Recall (1990 film)#Aftermath for (an) example(s)
- Comment: I'm not able to find enough content to justify a separate section....so shall I remove it then?
  - My two (whatever currency)? Yes
    - Done here
In the table, we've still got some... (weird?) formatting. There's "82nd Academy Awards" and "SFX Awards", for example.
- Comment: So just to confirm, you want the year/number to be written before each respective award?
  - No... I just want it to be consistent, i.e. say "Academy Awards" instead of "82nd Awards" to be consistent with "SFX Awards" or "[Number]st SFX Award" to be consistent with others. Any formatting is fine as long as it is consistent.
    - Done here

A few sources I'm iffy on:

WP:IMDB; the Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards are sourced to it
- I added another ref alongside
  - Can IMDb be removed entirely? It's not an appropriate source for this
    - Ok
Squarespace
- Y Replaced
Zimbio
- The only other sources I can find apart from zimbio are this and this....
  - The two alts are not RSes... any evidence of an editorial or just paid staff in general at Zimbio?
    - I don't think it is a proper editorial
The Leaky Cauldron
- Done

There's my second look... Pamzeis (talk) 06:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamzeis, I have made most corrections. Kpddg ^(talk) 08:47, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Third look

It is the fifth-highest-grossing film in the franchise — um... OK... soooooooo... maybe just remove it because it's also the third-lowest-grossing film in the series... so..... being the fifth-highest isn't really significant....
- Done here
The pair meets with Death → The pair meet with Death
- Done here
year-old Tom Riddle, with Frank Dillane playing 16-year-old young version of Lord Voldemort — maybe some consistency between Riddle / Voldy would be helpful
- Done here
realistic style."" He also noted — extra quote mark (also, side note, the extra quote mark hurts my eyes )
- Done here
On Dumbledore's ring of fire to combat the Inferi, he added, "We did a lot of research on molten volcanoes, which have a lot of heat going on but no actual flames, and collected a bunch of other references, including flares that burn underwater, and showed them to the Potter folks. The visual effects team emulated these six fire parameters: heat ripples, smoke, buoyancy, viscosity, opacity, and brightness. Since the whole fire scene was very time-consuming, computer graphics artist Chris Horvath spent eight months finding a faster way to conjure flames." — ...too much quote
- Done here
without it there was — comma after it
- Done here
A 15-second teaser, the first for the film, was shown — the way this is written is kinda awkward and confusing...
- Done here
The film was released in the United Kingdom, United States, France, Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Sweden, Canada, Australia, Taiwan, New Zealand, India, Brazil, Spain, Mexico and Japan on 15 July 2009. — the list is kinda long-winded... I doubt anyone would read the whole thing... maybe say several countries or something and add an ((efn)) note to specify which (e.g. The film was released in several countries on 15 July 2009.^[a])
- Done
The Blu-ray and DVD includes an 11-minute — The Blu-ray and DVD include an 11-minute
- Done here
This also includes deleted — what is "this"?
- Done It refers to both the Blueray and DVD, so I changed it to these

box office run the total ticket — comma after run
- Done here

Yay! I finally did this in a timely manner! Pamzeis (talk) 02:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamzeis, I have made all the required corrections here. Kpddg ^(talk) 14:38, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

^ These countries were Sweden, Australia, Canada and whatever

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Fourth look

Harry reunites with best friends → Harry reunites with his best friends
- Done here
the werewolf Fenrir Greyback at — comma after Greyback
- Done here
position before Severus Snape. — remove the full stop
- Done here
that a lot of — unencyclopaedic wording
- Done here
15-secons, was — typo?
- Done here
Tom Riddle's orphanage was released — comma before was
- Done here
also includes deleted scenes — include
- Done here
Zimbio is still cited
- I removed the reference along with the corresponding statement, as no other source can be found
What makes crawlerscastingcalls.com a reliable source?
- Question: Where exactly is this website?
  - Y Found and removed
What makes qa-faq.com an RS?
- Y removed here, another citation is there alongside
The Writing Studio is still cited
- This and emol source a quote from aninterview. Not able to find an RS...
  Just being an interview does not make something reliable. Like magazine and newspaper articles, they can be fabricated.
  - Done here
What makes emol.org a reliable source?
- Above
  - above
What makes Lochaber News an RS?
- Y Replaced in both instances, with Daily Record
What makes iesb.net a reliable source?
- Question: I'm not able to find this as well
  - Y Now found and removed
What makes Wiltshire Times a reliable source?
- The Wiltshire Times seems to be fine...
What makes This is Local London a reliable source?
- Y Replaced with Surrey Comet
What makes Gloucestershire on Screen an RS?
- Y Replaced with BBC
What makes The Citizen a reliable source?
- Y Replaced with BBC
What makes IndieLondon a reliable source?
- Comment: There seems to be no other reliable source, so I'll remove the statement..
  - Not done yet...
    - Done here
Post Magazine?
- Done here
Noble PR?
- Y removed
Trailer Addict?
- Y replaced
HPANA?
- Y 1, 2, 3
Scifiwire?
- Y Replaced with Reuters
The lead mentions the film was once the eight-highest grossing film of all time but the body doesn't
- Done here
The last paragraph of #Critical response is uncited
- Done here

So close! Pamzeis (talk) 04:42, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pamzeis, I've replied to all the points raised. Kpddg ^(talk) 11:31, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Fifth look

Check above for comments regarding sources

Just that and we're done! Pamzeis (talk) 07:12, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pamzeis, I'm done! Kpddg ^(talk) 08:15, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Sixth look

I... I think that's a pass from me! Probably my longest GA review ever. Pamzeis (talk) 00:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Pamzeis for this review! The article has improved a lot!!

Kpddg ^(talk) 06:06, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 22:39, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Emma Watson considered quitting the Harry Potter film series, but later returned to star in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince? Source: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2007/mar/19/news1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6491047.stm
- ALT1: ... that with a budget of $250 million, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is one of the most expensive films ever made? Source: https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt0417741/ https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/gallery/24-most-expensive-movies-ever-made/
- ALT2: ... that the postponement of the release date of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince led to widespread negative reactions, including the filing of petitions? Source: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-aug-15-fi-potter15-story.html

Improved to Good Article status by Kpddg (talk). Self-nominated at 07:58, 23 May 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Article is netural, meets the required length, and is sufficiently referenced (personally I'd prefer to see more content in GAs like this, since I know the information is out there, but I suppose that's more for FAs). Promoted to GA on 23 May, the same day as this nomination. Hooks are interesting, succinct, and reliably sourced—the first one is definitely the most interesting, followed by ALT2 then ALT1. Nominator is exempt from QPQ. Nothing else needed—this is good to go! – Rhain ☔ 06:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Kpddg ^(talk) 07:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]