The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. postdlf (talk) 16:27, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of spells in Harry Potter[edit]

List of spells in Harry Potter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This is just a retelling of seemingly every detail within the Harry Potter universe. It is absurdly long and I don't see how it could be edited into a good article. The articles on Harry Potter and the individual books cover the important plot points. This is just excessive and is better served by a Harry Potter dedicated wiki (harrypotter.wikia.com/). It is a fan article and there is no reason for it to be here, I'm sorry. El cid, el campeador (talk) 16:44, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:09, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, as per Fictional universe of Harry Potter. Artw (talk) 20:27, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:17, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Artw (talk) 22:09, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the sources demonstrated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magic in Harry Potter. Jclemens (talk) 03:50, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - While Magic in Harry Potter could potentially be reworked if sources exist, this will never be anything but a Wikia-tier plot dump. As a companion article, this holds no purpose. There is no particular reason anyone should be looking for spells in context with plot summaries. The plot summaries should detail the purpose of the spell, if it is deemed important enough for the summary. If there are any that are truly iconic, they should be mentioned in the main article, or "Magic in Harry Potter" should that be reworked. TTN (talk) 19:48, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete- this is mostly the same plot summary already covered in a dozen other "XYZ in Harry Potter" articles. How often, and in how many different ways, must we cover the same plot dump? Reyk _YO! 07:45, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Evanesco. A general discussion of HP magic is fine, but not every instance of it. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:16, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I agree with the above delete votes and the nominator on that this does not have notability outside of the series itself. This appears to be more appropriate to the Harry Potter wikia than Wikipedia. Aoba47 (talk) 15:05, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Cool but unencyclopedic. Magic in HPU can be discussed for its influences, significance, etc. List of spells is pure fancruft. And this is better done on Harry Potter wikia - http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Spell and many others. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:41, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Breaks my heart to do this, I'm a big Harry Potter fan, but you can really only justify so many HP pages on wikipedia. Deathlibrarian (talk)
• Delete - Unencyclopedic trivia. Carrite (talk) 15:32, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.