Talk:J.K. Rowling/Archive 06

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


Contents

JK Rowling No Period

Jo is a Scot. Scotland is part of the UK. In the UK we don't put fartsy periods all over the place. In the UK Jo's name is 'JK Rowling'. Please have some decency and respect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.193.125.44 (talk • contribs)

Wrong and wrong - good start. You're obviously not a Brit as nobody in the UK calls a full-stop a 'period', to a Brit a period is something completely different and much much scarier. Jo is English if it matters, born in Yate near Bristol. And British people most certainly do use full-stops all over the place - that is if they've actually been taught spelling and grammar. Oh and new talk subjects should be added to the end of the page. AulaTPN 22:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
She pretty much is an adopted Scot, and her books were aided quite a bit by Scotland (arts grant and welfare). Now she pays the bulk of her taxes there, and is thrilled to have a Scottish PM. Perhaps a bit more on her relationship with Scotland? http://www.rampantscotland.com/famous/bldev_famrowling.htm Libertycookies 12:11, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
True but the money for those grants ultimately comes from the UK Treasury and no matter where you pay your taxes in the UK they all still go to the same place. Unlike the US we have no concept of a local income tax. There's council tax but that's a whole other can of worms... AulaTPN 18:14, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Studied writing or literature in the USA?

I'd heard somewhere that she had done a master's degree in writing in the USA - if true implying that she wasnt as skint as her image makes out. 80.0.104.93 23:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I had never been to America, for example, before 1998 and the first time I went for a book signing, which as incredible. JK Rowling, 2005 [1]
So either you're wrong, or she's lying. And if you're going to accuse her of lying, you'll need some pretty hefty evidence to back your claim up. Serendipodous 05:40, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
This is a new one on me. AulaTPN 20:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
She's visited the U.S., and that is about the extent of it. Libertycookies 12:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Privacy of Rowling

With so many assumptions in the media about why Rowling is shy and private, we probably should address the various viewpoints here. Here's a rough draft, needs work, and I've thrown notes in so you can see where I'm trying to go. I can track down the quotes if you guys think it is an appropriate subject. Libertycookies 13:34, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Rowling is often portrayed as shunning the media [several quotes available]. The Independent recently wrote: "she remains an enigma - an intensely private person with a craving for security, a horror of intrusion, a distrust of fame ("I never wanted it and I never expected it and certainly never worked for it, and I see it as something I have to get through really")." [2]

There is indication that much of the books are personal [Hermoine "somewhat autobiographical" quote|quote that she'd finish the books if only for herself] and she stays quiet to avoid spoiling the plot [website plea to not spoil ending]. In an interview discussing the controversy over the books promoting witchcraft she said, "Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books. 'You can lead a fool to a book but you can't make them think'. Vancouver Sun (2000-10-26). Retrieved on 2007-05-01.

After Deathly Hallows was released, Meredith Vieira from the Today show said she read that Rowling was not an easy interview and “aloof,” but found her very much the opposite: warm and charming. She said Rowling was "protective of her material but not proprietary", Vieira explained, "In so many other interviews she had to be guarded. There was still this whole series and she didn’t want to reveal secrets before now." [3]

I have no problems in adding some text about Rowling shunning the media, if we have such sources. As for the "autobiography" claims, I am not so sure, unless there is wide consensus of sources on the subject or, at least, a significant vioewpoint in this regard (and not some vague speculation by a journalist). ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 18:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Mitford connection

I found a good quote from Rowling in the Guardian that sums up why she likes Mitford. Can we add it? Libertycookies 20:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Rowling named her daughter after Jessica Mitford, sister of Nancy, author and avowed communist, whose autobiography Rowling read as a teenager. "Basically, [Mitford] had every single possible component you could want as a 13-year-old leftwinger." http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/childrenandteens/story/0,,474412,00.html

Not really. You can say that Rowling said in an interview that "[Mitford] had every single possible component you could want as a 13-year-old leftwinger". But you cannot paraphrase the journalist that make that assertion. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:30, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking the subject could be added to the Early life section? Since the topic of Mitford comes up again and again in Rowling's life, maybe 2 paragraphs? Libertycookies 23:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
When Rowling was a young teen, she overheard her great-aunt discussing how Jessica Mitford had run away at the age of 19 to fight with the Reds in the Spanish Civil War. Rowling says her great-aunt, "who taught classics and approved of a thirst for knowledge, even of a questionable kind" then gave her a very old copy of Mitford's autobiography, Hons and Rebels." [4] Rowling said in the Scotsman, "I wished I'd had the nerve to do something like [Mitford had done]. I love the way she never outgrew some of her adolescent traits, remaining true to her politics - she was a self-taught socialist - throughout her life.
Rowling told the Scotsman she read all of Mitford's books, [5] and Rowling wrote an article about Mitford for the Telegraph, The First "It" Girl. Rowling said in the Guardian that "[Mitford] had every single possible component you could want as a 13-year-old leftwinger." [6]
See: Harry Potter influences and analogues Serendipodous 08:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Rowling is a real person, and Harry Potter is a fictional character in a book. There may be reason to keep it in the HP article, since names and themes seem to come from Mitford's books. Posted in the article unless there is a legitimate complaint. Libertycookies 22:40, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Too long, though, giving undue weight to that specific comment. Please summarize and keep the quotes in the footnotes. One sentence will suffice. If you do not know how to summarize, ask. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
It's long because Rowling is such a Mitford fanatic. Which specific comment? The first sentence is long because it addresses both Mitford and her great aunt both of whom had a strong influence on Rowling. It actually is very short for the amount of information it conveys. Libertycookies 23:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
It is too long in relation to the section about "Early life". Give it a try. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:29, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Rowling in secondary school

We need to bolster that section. Maybe mention her friend who owned a Ford Anglia and she said she based Ron Weasley on. Mention her punky phase, where she listened to the Clash, Smiths and Siouxsie and the Banshees or how she sas a swot like Hermoine, whom she said was somewhat autobiographical.

We should really include what happened to her in the period of time when her characters in the books are growing up. Libertycookies 22:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure, that will be a great addition, if we have sources for it, that is. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
"My favorite group in the world is the Smiths. And when I was going through a punky phase, it was the Clash." -J.K. Rowling Conversations with J.K. Rowling, Scholastic. pg 29. (more about Mitford on pg 27...)
Sean Harris, her best friend in the Upper Sixth [12th grade] owned a turquoise Ford Anglia. "Ron Weasley isn't a living portrait of Sean, but he really is very Sean-ish. -Rowling, ibid, pg 19-20.
"Hermione is loosely based on me. She's a caricature of me when I was 11, which I'm not particularly proud of. She's quite annoying in a lot of ways. I like her as a character, but I'm very aware that some people wouldn't." [7]
Mmmmm.... not so sure about the last one, but will not oppose 1 and 2, Just please attribute it properly to the source: Feldman, Roxanne. "The Truth about Harry," School Library Journal, September 1999. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

re: Rowling's marriage to Jorge Arantes

In light of Jossi's removal of what I assumed was a sourced comment, it seems pertinent to discuss whether it would be relevant or within guidelines to seek out proper sources regarding her supposedly abusive marriage to Jorge Arantes. There are sources I could post, but I'm not sure how reliable they could be. Even if I could find an impartial source, how relevant to the topic would such information be? The most vivid account was given by Rowling's father to the Daily Mirror: [8], but given what he subsequently told the Mirror a few months later, [9]he hardly seems like an impartial witness to events. The Scotsman has a very detailed account of their marriage as well [10] though I wouldn't give the writer points for journalistic integrity or objectivity. But then, when can you these days? Serendipodous 17:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

You could source the removed material to J.K. Rowling a biography pg 115. Smith, Sean. Michael O'Mara Books, LTD 2001, 2003. There are numerous accounts of the volativity of her marriage, so probably just what was there is sufficient. Libertycookies 20:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Rowling absolutely loathes that book, and from what I've read of it, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't describe it as a reliable source; it makes some pretty spectacular logical leaps, connecting every minor event in the books to every major event in her life without a shred of evidence in support. Serendipodous 05:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree there is a lot of speculation in that book, but it has been published twice, and to my knowledge no challenges from Rowling either in the courts or on her website about the "being thrown out by Arantes." It's not a subject I'm very passionate about including, but you could attribute the "rumored being thrown out" quote to Smith saying "he claims". Many of the other articles you mention probably just feed from Smith or from hearsay, as much of Smith's work. He is probably the most liable if it is a question of defamation.
Other suggestions? Libertycookies 13:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I will not use that book as a source for biographical aspects. If there is substantial sources and therie is wide consensus of sources about it, then we should consider it. Otherwise, it is a private matter and not relevant to her notability. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Its also in Muggles and Magic pg 13 by George Beahm, but was attributed to "The J.K. Rowling Story" by Stephen McGinty, The Scotsman. The media seems to be pretty incestuous on the sorrid details of her marriage. How about putting it in her words? Libertycookies 19:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Rowling says in Conversations with J.K. Rowling, (pg 42-43) that "having Jessica was without a doubt, the best moment of [her] life." She explains that she moved to Edinburgh because "it became clear that my marriage wasn't working, and I decided it would be easier if I came back to Britain."

Autobiographical aspects of Harry Potter

Rowling is known for her reticance in discussing her personal life, as well as her disdain for spoilers of her books, which may be due to the somewhat autobiographical nature of Harry Potter. In addition to Ron Weasley and Hermoine Granger being inspired by her best friend and herself, Rowling said that Ernie and Stanley, the driver and conductor of the Knight Bus, were named after her grandfathers. [Conversations with J.K. Rowling pg 12]. Rowling's mother came from a family of teachers, "was a huge reader," and was "quite bookish" which Rowling said was a big influence on her. (ibid pg 12) Dobby the house elf seems to come from her heroine, Jessica Mitford's second autobiography, A Fine Old Conflict. [11] Rowling says that the Dementors are representative of Depression, which she experienced while on the dole in Edinburgh [Chaundy, Bob. "Harry Potter's magician". BBC, 18 February 2003][12]. The death of her mother to MS aided in her description of Harry's longing in the Mirror of Erised in which Rowling said she "would see exactly what Harry saw." ["Harry Potter Charms a Nation," Electronic Telegraph (July 25, 1998)]. When asked how she got the idea of writing about magic, Rowling said "When I was younger, I think my greatest fantasy would have been to find out that I had powers that I'd never dreamt of, that I was special." [From radio interview with Margo Adler, All Things Considered, NPR (October 2000)]. Rowling shares a birthday with her protaganist, Harry, of 31 July, and says if people had asked her more about her [Christian] faith they could probably guess where the series was going.

J.K. Rowling says she is "left wing" and that there is a certain amount of "political stuff" in Harry Potter, but that "every reader will bring his own agenda to the book."[1]

Several articles have noted the leftist influences of Rowling's heroine, one-time Communist Jessica Mitford, on the Harry Potter series, with the themes of cooperation among the magical races[2], racism, and the slavery of House elves.[3]


Would something like this be okay for inclusion, or a spinoff article? Theres more, and I can look up the sources if you guys are agreeable to the subject. Libertycookies 14:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
That is good and interesting material if you can find good sources to support it. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Are the attributions okay? Can we post? 70.137.148.86 00:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Philanthropist

Nice word Jossi! I added her to the wiki list with Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and Mother Teresa. What odd bedfellows. Libertycookies 21:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't know what you mean by that, but a living person that gives 22 million pounds of her money to comic relief and raised that much on special books dedicated to charitable work, is a philanthropist. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I meant it in serious praise and wished I would have thought of the word myself. Libertycookies 07:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Freeze the page

Hey Jossi, maybe we should put a moratorium on change for a few days? Libertycookies 22:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

What we need is to be ready for the onslaught when the 7th book is made available... Vandalism galore is guaranteed... ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Then this page should be semi-protected, like Harry Potter. Serendipodous 06:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected sounds good. I saw some yahoo trying to vandalize with a spoiler already. At least I'm trying to contribute positively, although sometimes slanted. Libertycookies 07:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
I've always been surprised that this page isn't semi-protected anyway. AulaTPN 08:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Sprotected for 1 month. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:10, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Title

Although Joanne is her real name, she is best known to millions as J.K. Rowling. Per WP:NAME, the article should be under the latter name, so I'm going to move it. Exploding Boy 05:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Now, I'm no stickler for pronunciation, but when someone tells me what version of English pronunciation to use, I become offended. While Rowling's last name may be pronounced "rolling" in Britain, I certainly have never heard that pronunciation in my life. The closest American pronunciation to that is "rahling" but most of the time it is pronounced "rohwling" here.

For comparison, I would never expect anyone in their right mind to suggest that everyone should pronounce Harry Potter's name "Hahree Pawtah." It's just ridiculous that anyone could possibly suggest that. So why here is there given a sole pronunciation for Rowling, without even indicating that it's only a British version of the pronunciation, or even just the way she pronounces it?

Perhaps we could say something like this as a compromise:

Rowling pronounces her surname "rolling" (IPA: /rəʊ.lɪŋ/)[4] as is customary in British English, but accepts the common American pronunciation "rohwling" IPA: /raʊ.lɪŋ/.[5]

I was surprised to have just found a source for the fact that she accepts the American pronunciation (albeit, I'm sure, reluctantly). Regardless, I do believe it is important that the alternative pronunciation is included. If there is no response here soon, I'll make the changes myself. Thanks to anyone who gives feedback. └Jared┘┌t┐  01:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

While it is acceptable for pronunciations of common words to vary, a name should be pronounced the way the person whose name it is decrees. The American pronunciation of "rohwling" is actually a mistake. One of the names in my family is Brough, which we pronounce "bruff." Other families with this surname often pronounce it "broh". That might be a correct pronunciation for their name but not for our name. Karanacs 01:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I do recognize this, which is why I was a bit hesitant in posting this suggestion, but I came to the decision to propose this because of the fact that I found the source above, citing that Rowling does accept the American pronunciation in addition. Look, I'm not here to try to encourage the use of the American pronunciation, nor am I trying to prove either of them more appropriate than the other; I'm just looking for the encyclopedia to be as honest as possible. And when you come to think of it, there are more people pronouncing it the American way than the British way, just by virtue of geography! This alone certainly does not merit it a valid pronunciation, but due to the widespread use of the pronunciation and her apparent indifference at the use of it, I would suggest that my version be included in the article. If you have an alternate way of suggesting the same thing, I would appreciate your (or anyone else's) suggestions, as always! └Jared┘┌t┐  01:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
As a continuation, Tony Blair's last name is pronounced "Blaih" in British English, but "Blare" in American English. I'm sure he no problem with this, just as Rowling doesn't. It's just a simple alteration of a vowel sound that comes natural to different variations of language. In America, Rowling would never be pronounced "rolling" just as Blair would never be pronounced "Blaih." Sure, the home language's pronunciation is usually the best, but that sure isn't going to make me change the way I mouth my vowels! That is why the American version should be introduced as well. It's more NPOV that way. └Jared┘┌t┐  01:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
The article is about one person — J.K. Rowling — and mentions how she customarily pronounces her own name. The fact that somebody else with the surname Rowling might use a different pronunciation is obvious and not relevant to the article. There is nothing particularly wrong with your alternative version but it amazes me that you could classify a routine pronunciation guide as "offensive" or NPOV. Xanthoxyl 04:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
On second thought, if the bald statement "Her name is pronounced..." strikes you as slightly bossy then go ahead and make the change, seeing as your version is concise, provides more information and gives the source. Xanthoxyl 05:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
The fact that she "accepts" an alternative pronounciation is a minor fact about her and should by no means be in the lead, if in the bio at all. Hornplease 06:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Not only Americans pronounce her name "gRowling"; plenty of British people do too, just as many Americans pronounce her name "rolling". "gRowling" isn't an "American pronunciation", it's just wrong. This "compromise' is an insult to Americans; it's basically saying that they reserve the right to be ignorant.Serendipodous 06:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
To quote an episode of MuggleCast it's pronounced "Rowling like bowling" - end of story. It particularly winds me up when people insist on pronouncing it like "Howling" - ugh! AulaTPN 08:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
And by the way, where in that article does it say that she "accepts" this alternate pronunciation of her name? I went through that article line by line and didn't find any mention of it. Serendipodous 11:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll try to respond to everyone above concisely. First, I'll set it straight that it's not to be in the lead, but the first sentence in the paragraph of the Name section. I would not in a million years try to force this into the lead. As to the comment about the growling version not solely being American, I apologize to my fellow Americans if I was offensive in making that crude generalization, and now that I think of it, it is way too generalized, so I will attempt to fix this when I relook my proposed change. In response to the general "it's incorrect, so why include it at all?" opposition, look, I know it may not be the author's preferred pronunciation, but whether she likes it or not, it's inevitable that Americans and apparently Brits alike will pronounce is a wrong way that she is apparently indifferent about (and by the way, it says so in a little box on the left hand side, not in the article). So due to the fact that it is not the way it should be pronounced by Rowling, and that not only Americans pronounce it growling, I will amend the suggested sentence to the following:

Rowling pronounces her surname "rolling" (IPA: /rəʊ.lɪŋ/),[4] but accepts the widely-used variant "rohwling" IPA: /raʊ.lɪŋ/.[5]

I think this is more appropriate than what I last suggested. This version does not tell people that they're pronouncing it wrong or right, as is how it should be. It only exposes the two pronunciations, and hints at the fact that it should be pronounced "rolling" because that is what the author uses. └Jared┘┌t┐  13:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

What I don't get is why you are treating the way Rowling pronounces her last name as a kind of personal fashion statement. I'm willing to bet you wouldn't accept half the people you met mispronouncing your surname. Rowling pronounces her last name "rolling" because that's how the rest of her family pronounce it. Ergo, that is how her surname is pronounced. Just because other people mispronounce it that doesn't make it correct. That infobox didn't explain why Rowling accepted this variance in pronunciation; is it because she doesn't care how her name is pronounced, or is it because she recognises that she can't teach 100 million people correct pronunciation? Serendipodous 13:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
We're an encyclopedia! We don't have to say why. We don't have to analyze the information we receive. We just have to display it in a NPOV way. Saying that someone should pronounce something one way, without even recognizing the alternate and more widely-used pronunciation, it just making a statement in and of itself.
And since you brought it up, yes, it may bother me when people pronounce my last name different from how I pronounce it, but the fact is, there are so many ways to pronounce things that there is no one right way. There is a preferred way, but no right way. For example, the principal at my school speaks with an Irish accent; he's Irish. Because of this, every time he pronounces my last name, he'll say it differently than how I pronounce it (and likewise, I say his last name different than he pronounces his). And I don't care because I know that it's only a regional difference in pronunciation that is causing him to do this. No hard feelings.
Look at Iraq#Etymology. There it offers 3 different pronunciations: the best one, an acceptable one, and one that is considered unacceptable. That is the way it should go down here. By not recognizing a pronunciation that is common, we are just slapping those who say it like that in the face (an exaggeration, of course). We should at least say "hey, here's how the author condones the pronunciation, but look, there's a widely-used variant that may not be to the author's style of speaking, but that she 'happily accepts.'" I think it's the only way to go here, and my alternate does this. If anyone would like to suggest something different in addition to their reasons against mine, please do it! It doesn't get us anywhere if I'm the only one suggesting things here! └Jared┘┌t┐  14:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Before we put words into Rowling's mouth, I'd prefer a direct quote from her on the issue, indeed, I would prefer a comment that was attributed to anyone at all, rather than a single sentence in a box on the side of a fairly scanty and inconseqential report. Serendipodous 14:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
As would I. It would have made my case a lot stronger. But I'm not going to doubt AP and CBS. I think they're very reliable sources. And ever regardless of whether she accepts the name or not (I wouldn't care if there was a source that says "Don't ever call me by the pronunciation or I'll cut your head off!), it is still important to recognize the alternate. I don't know how we should do this, but I've offered my suggested sentence.
On a side-bar, it's customary to strike out something you've already submitted rather than change the wording. No big deal, but I thought you might want to know. └Jared┘┌t┐  14:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I just did a search of Accio Quote and found nothing relating to her accepting any alternate pronunciations of her name. She sticks with "rolling." But regardless, I don't buy your argument. This is the internet. The entire English-speaking world has access to our site. We can therefore tell millions of people the simple facts. Rowling's surname is pronounced "rolling." Some people pronounce it "growling", and those people are incorrect. The more people see the correct pronunciation of her name, the fewer people will pronounce it incorrectly and the less this "variant" will matter. Serendipodous 14:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
No, that's where I believe that you're intrinsically wrong. Wikipedia isn't here to tell people what to do. It's here to report on what's already been done. Think of it like this: each article is supposed to be an expository essay, not a persuasive essay. And currently, there are two pronunciations: one condoned as correct by the author, and one I'm sure reluctantly accepted by the author but widely accepted by the general public. The Iraq article, as I mentioned above, does a superb job at exposing the various pronunciations, and then telling which is more appropriate to use. And that's what should be done here. └Jared┘┌t┐  14:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
"We're an encyclopedia! We don't have to say why." Wow I don't even know where to start telling you what's wrong with that statement. The most fundamental requirement of an encyclopaedia is that the information contained therein should be correct. As she is very specific about the way her surname is pronounced then the 'only correct way to pronounce it is 'rolling'. Why is this even being debated I fail to see how adding anything to this section achieves any effect other than to introduce incorrect information? Oh and it is only custom practice to strike your comments if you are retracting them, not if you are re-writing them to expand or clarify what you've said. AulaTPN 14:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm done arguing this due to the fact that I believe my argument was more cogent. Everything that I will add to the main page will be correct information. After careful consideration of the facts, I will drop the CBS source and eliminate any suggestion as to the fact that she accepts the alternate pronunciation. I will, however, include the alternate pronunciation, indicating that it is incorrect, but a widely-used variant. I believe that you will agree with this.
And about the comments thing, I may have said it poorly, but what I meant was that anytime you change what you have already written, you should strike you old comments and insert the new ones after. Sorry for the mistake. └Jared┘┌t┐  15:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
More cogent? Hardly. Your edit to the article is way to strong in favour of the alternative pronunciation. It should state that the correct pronunciation is "rolling" and that, although widely used, "rohling" is incorrect. Also, British English has nothing to do with it - it's not a UK/US thing, it's an issue of ignorance. AulaTPN 15:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
There's a big difference between regional pronunciations of various words and the pronunciation of names. Even allowing for regional differrences in pronunciation of certain names (like Sean, for example), there are clearly two possible pronunciations for a name like "Rowling": "rolling" or "r "ow" ling." This isn't a case of regional variation, but of a range of possible pronunciations: in this case, there is a right and a wrong pronunciation, just like the famous river is called the "tems" not the "thaymes." The article should use the correct pronunciation, which is the one Rowling herself uses. (Compare, for example, Catherine Zeta-Jones. She has said herself that the correct pronunciation is "zetta," but she goes by "zeeta"). Exploding Boy 15:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted the addition by Jared because consensus among the editors at this point as that this statement does not belong. The article is about JK Rowling, not about the millions of people who mispronounce her name. We should stick to the simple fact that this is how she pronounces her name and leave it at that. People who have been pronouncing the other way will therefore be able to infer that their pronunciation is wrong. Additionally, the statement was unsourced and inserted into a paragraph that was sourced, thus implying that the reference at the end of the paragraph also covered its claim. Karanacs 15:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree, and would add that the statement that the other pronunciation is "regarded as incorrect in British English" is untrue. It's a possible pronunciation that is simply incorrect in the case of J.K. Exploding Boy 15:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
So are we just going to ignore all those people who pronounce it Rohwling? It deserves at least some mention in the article, right! Whether it's right or wrong, it's used and we cannot ignore that fact! └Jared┘┌t┐  15:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes we can, because it is irrellevant. A large number of people think that Rowling is a Satanist and servant of the antichrist, but their opinions are not included here. Members of the John Birch Society think that Rowling is a Communist. Their opinions are not included here. Those people who pronounce her name "growling" are similarly irrellevant to Rowling's biography and can therefore be summarily excluded.Serendipodous 16:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Fine. I'm very disappointed at the lack of an attempt to negotiate here, and would have expected better of people editing as such a well-written article. However, I don't see that I will be gaining any greater footholds here, so I have changed the article so something that we can both agree is true. Maybe I'll address my concern at a later time, but for now, I find it unfortunate that, though I have cited numerous instances where my reasoning has been precedented and correct, not one person here can see where I'm coming from. I wish everyone the best of luck editing here. └Jared┘┌t┐  16:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)]

Jared, please note that there is a very big difference in what someone's name is (i.e., what are the words) and how that name is pronounced. There is also a huge difference in what the appropriate pronunciation of a WORD is and how to pronounce the NAME. Just because British English leans towards pronouncing Rowling like bowling doesn't mean she would have to pronounce it that way. There is no need in explaining why her family pronounces their name the way they do. As for her name, when Harry Potter was originally released some news reports actually reported that Kathleen was part of her name; they did not report that her name was pronounced a different way. That is why one is included here and one is not. Please do not add information into the article until gaining consensus. At this point, the consensus among the editors of this page is not to include information on incorrect pronunciations. Karanacs 21:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted Jared's change again. You seem to be pretty familiar with Wiki Policies so I'm sure you know that what you're doing is against established consensus and hence liable for repeated and imminent reversion? This also includes your attempt to dilute the correctness of the pronunciation by changing the para from 'Rowling's surname is pronounced' to 'Rowling pronounces her surname', that's dangerously similar to using weasel words. AulaTPN 21:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I'll end it like this: I shouldn't need consensus to make an edit fully cited and appropriate to the context of the article. Even still, I came to the talk page out of my common courtesy to alert other editors of my future change. If the only viable reason here for not including the most common pronunciation world-wide for her name is because it may suggest that it is "OK" to use (which it truly is, anyway) then I am deeply disheartened at the lack of thought put into this discussion. Look, people come to this page to gain information. Why should we leave anything out? Whether it's right or wrong, but yet still pertinent to the topic, still include the information, just say why it's right or wrong; simple as that.
I was never trying to dilute anything here. I only wanted to ensure that there was no POV pushing, and saying "Rowling's name is pronounced" is a blatant command and a poor phrase in an expository article, if you ask me.
I'm a member of a WikiProject and I know that while my colleagues and I there like to do things our way, we are always open to suggestions and changes to our "norms" and express this on a regular basis. It may seem like I'm preaching to you, but from experience (and not that long of experience, actually), I know how to handle suggestions to edit pages differently. And I know that if pages edits are handled like the one above, this article will never progress. (Just look at the fact that the article is 90% about Harry Potter, for example.)
I hope that you all at least saw where I was coming from, and hope that in the future, claims can be handled in a more cooperative manner. I would rather not clutter this talk page with more talk about this, so if you have additional concerns or comments, drop me a note on my talk page or e-mail me through Wikipedia. └Jared┘┌t┐  02:43, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
It's quite simple: her name is pronounced to rhyme with rolling; you can pronounce it other ways, and maybe other people will understand you, but that is not her name. Similarly, you could spell her name 'Rolling', and people might understand you, but her name is not spelt 'Rolling'. That is not her name. I could call you 'Shareed', and maybe people would know who I was referring to, but that wouldn't make it your username; your username is not spelt like that. It's not even an accent thing, since Americans and Britons are quite capable of saying 'rolling'. On top of this, the only cite you provided for the claim that she finds the other pronunciation acceptable was rather dubious compared to the cites for how her name is actually pronounced. Anyway, better luck next time :) Skittle 01:55, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
This is entirely ridiculous! I don't know what the Hell the original poster is talking about, but I have never EVER heard anyone here in the U.S. pronounce her name "rohwling". Everyone here says "rolling", it's not just a British thing, so we should just finds another way to paraphrase it. Any mention of a different "American pronunciation" should be taken out immediately, as the majority of us say it the same way as the rest of the world. It shouldn't be taken completely out of the article, however, as anyone who doesn't know how to pronounce her name will. Therequiembellishere 03:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Hilarious. Do you correct people if they pronounce your name wrong? It's an encyclopedia and should only list how the name is properly pronounced, i.e. how she pronounces it. Or shall we mention that the Japanese might pronounce it as "ro-ree-n-gu" and explain how those with speech impediments might pronounce it? Jesus Christ. Yeah, tons of people pronounce it "rohwling," and not only in the U.S. -- but it's not even a matter of varying accents as you're trying to suggest ("Hahree Pawtah"), it's a matter of ignorance. :) And when the holy crap did she ever say she "accepts" the "American" (more accurately called "ignorant") way of pronouncing her name? Not that I think Jo would pummel someone for mispronouncing her name -- I just find it funny that you're flippin' over this, yet have no problem with writing Jo's biography Rita Skeeter style. :D --70.55.39.170 03:56, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Mismatched pages

Could we get the talk page on the same name as the article page is on, please? └Jared┘┌t┐  18:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Yup. User:Mr. panadol incorrectly moved the article and its talk page from J. K. Rowling to Joanne Rowling. User:Exploding Boy then attempted to revert that change, as per WP:NAME, by moving back but accidentally moved the pages to J.K. Rowling. The article was subsequently re-moved & redirected but not the talk page. The change is now working it's way through the Requested Moves process. AulaTPN 22:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I just figured someone here was an admin who could make the change right away to at least match them. └Jared┘┌t┐  23:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Someone change the "Harry Potter" section to read that seven out of seven books have been published.