Talk:Minor Dark wizards in Harry Potter

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

Rowle & Dolohov[edit]

When Ron, Hermione and Harry were in the cafe in Tottenham Lord Voldemot's henchmen Rowle & Dolohov were not disguised as workmen. Somehow someone has put two and two together and got five. There were workmen over the road who were being loud and rude to Hermione but it makes absoloutely no reference to them being the Death Eater's. Also when they enter the cafe they immediatley started attacking so they were'nt wearing disguises at all. Editing.

I'm afraid Mr. or Mrs. 2+2=5 that you are wrong. If you are American, read Chapter Nine, pages 164-165 of Deathly Hallows a few times. Dolohov and Rowle were most certainly dressed as workmen as is mentioned at least twice on page 165.

Individual pages discussion[edit]

Please participate in the discussion at Talk:Harry_Potter#Breaking_apart_articles_of_characters regarding having individual pages for characters rather than group pages. --billlund 21:20, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Regulus Black[edit]

Some articles seem to take it as canon that R.A.B. is Regulus Black. But has JKR actually confirmed it? Knowing her, it may not be. Sonic Mew | talk to me 18:48, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

I agree, and I believe R.A.B. not to him. Although it seems rather important to put it here where it is. Attention is needed, though, as you say, because this cannot be taken as granted. --Jotomicron | talk 01:40, 20 July 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've just added that JK more or less confirmed Regulus Black being R.A.B. - see Mugglenet's Interview with her: [1] --FermatSim 17:45, 21 July 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, strictly she confirmed that it was a good guess, that there was indeed reason to think it could be him. Her words might be interpreted to mean that we are supposed to guess it was him, even though it later turns out not to be.Sandpiper 01:18, 3 October 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
'twas him indeed! Pretty pathetic way of finding out the proof though! -- Maijstral  09:36, 22 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fenrir Greyback[edit]

I think the Death Eater loyalty is not really correct. He is not (I believe, and it is not stated anywhere) a Death Eater. Writing Lord Voldemort instead would be better. --Jotomicron | talk 01:42, 20 July 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Where is it established in Harry Potter canon that werewolves can be born rather than having to be turned into werewolves after birth? This may be an element of other stories involving werewolves, but I don't recall it appearing in this particular variation of werewolf lore. --Icarus 18:10, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ironic that Dumbledore's middle name, Wulfric, means Wolf Ruler, don't you think :) Red Ed 13:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

btw Fenir Greyback isnt exactly a wizard, is he? So shouldn't he NOT be in this article? maybe change the title of the article to "Minor sevants of Lord Voldemort (Harry Potter)" or something O.O The pointer outer 20:31, 2 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should it really be in the article that Greyback is like Mussolini. That seems a little absurd to me. Should we also compare him to Saddam Hussein? Stalin? Mao? It's easy to come up with 'evil' stereotypes from history, but addition in an encyclopedia seems pointless. ABart26 20:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

R.A.B. has his own page. Shouldn't Greyback have his own too? They both are featured just as much in the novels (possibly Greyback by a little more) and they each are important to the storylines. Anyone else think Fenrir should get his own article? --Piemanmoo 09:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


What evidence is there that creating a Horcrux isn't always evil? Slughorn says in Book 6 that the soul is meant to remain whole, and that splitting it is against nature, which would, if anything, imply the contrary. It is one thing to suggest that killing 'by accident' or 'to save other people' is not evil, but another to say that creating a horcrux isn't evil either. As we know, there is a specific spell that must be cast to encase the fragment of soul in an object - it doesn't just jump out when you kill someone. If there's no objection, I think this latest edit should be removed.--Libatius 11:46, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

There is no proof, but there has relatively recently been an essay on saying that Fawkes is Dumbledore's horcrux- and most of the support is actually sound. You can read it for yourself to understand where that last editor was coming from, but in truth that last edit should be deleted... Emily (Funtrivia Freak) 00:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can we get a reference on Rowling saying that Grindelwald is dead? --user:Rdbrady April 12 2006

And is there any evidence that Dumbledore killed him? Rdbrady's question is spot on. Thanks for the essay Emily. I honestly find all the 'Dumbledore isn't really dead' chat as interesting as the next person, but I still stand by my initial comments. (I know you agreed that the edit should be removed - this is just to clarify for anyone else). I know this isn't the place to discuss what may or may not have happened to Dumbledore - there are more than enough people discussing the issue on - but the article is, in my humble opinion, a long way out there. In any case, there is just as much evidence to the contrary. Put simply, this page runs the risk of becoming a playground for anyone who has a Harry Potter theory if we allow this sort of edit, and the fact that it is 'new' doesn't make it any more valid. --Libatius 16:59, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
JKR confirmed that Grindelwald was dead in an interview with Mugglenet, but she didn't say that Dumbledore killed him (i believe Voldemort killed Grindelwald to create a horcrux)

This should probably be split into a different article once DH is released. From what I read, his role is large enough to warrant a seperate article.

Impossible. There is less than one line of information about Grindelwald from the whole series till now. What kind of a page can you create? Probably after HP7 comes out, we may do so. But till then, he's just a blip. Sniperz11 04:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Definitely should be spun off into a new article, he has a pretty big role in DH Skhatri2005 00:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Must be spun off: there's a huge amount of info about him in DH NYYW 21:30 July 2007 (UTC)
Yup. I agree. Sniperz11 01:54, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I concur. There's actually quite a bombshell in DH regarding Grindelwald, so it would be worth splitting the wizard out into a separate article. 02:47, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Prewetts[edit]

When is it ever stated that the Prewetts were Molly Weasley's brothers?

Yes, JKR has said it herself.--Jnelson09 16:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Avery was actually punished for giving Voldemort misinformation 'bout the department of mysteries. Is there any proof that Avery was the baby headed death eater? No, there is no proof, but that link will take you to a site that sort of...tries to figure out which death eater was which in the Battle of the Department of Mysteries. The person who wrote that article guessed that it was Crabbe Sr. who was the baby headed death eater.CaydenSelwyn 05:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

10 escaped death eatrs[edit]

who were the other 4 escaped death eaters? I only have 6.

Avery in the film Goblet Of Fire[edit]

I added Richard Rosson as playing Avery in the film a few weeks ago, but subsequently discovered that his part had been dropped from the film's cinematic edit. However, I have had word from Richard that he may be on the DVD issue of the film, but we are not aware if it will be as a bonus feature or part of the DVD edit of the feature. All I do know for sure is that he shot footage of Avery being tortured, and that he had one line of dialogue that went something like "yes master..." or "please forgive me master..." which he felt would probably be dubbed over. Richard is a contortionist so you can bet that his torture scenes would have been really good! McGonicle 23:07, 28 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Carrows being merged here[edit]

It seems like a good idea to me. Emily 03:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does this mean someone's gonna merge it? Emily (Funtrivia Freak) 01:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ah, now youre asking... Will have a look if I get time, but anyone gets there first, feel free Sandpiper 08:01, 14 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I went ahead and merged the articles.Bibliophile 13:27, 14 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Antonin Dolohov[edit]

Why does it say he was played by Vin Diesel? This just seems like speculation as its not listed on Vin Diesel's IMdB acting credits. Hadiz 21:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is there a reason why this minor dark wizard had his section deleted? Emily (Funtrivia Freak) 04:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I've added him again, but not everything from the old article, since I found it too long. Don't know why it was deleted, though. Neville Longbottom 20:32, 3 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The statement "Antonin is a French name" mayh be true, but Antonin Dvorak (forgive the lack of diacritics) was one of the most prominent Czech composers.

The suggestion that Antonin is a typical French name is nonsense as far as I know. It is mentioned as a French form of Antoninus on, but it's also listed as a Czech name. The statement that it's an Italian name doesn't seem to be supported. Rowling clearly meant Dolohov to hail from the Balkans (Bulgaria seems like a good guess, he might well be an acquaintance of Igor Karkaroff) and so it's reasonable to say that the name Antonin, in this case, is Czech. -- 12:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tagged for cleanup[edit]

I've tagged this article for cleanup with multiple tags explaining the various problems this article has. Some relevant guidelines to look at might be WP:V ,WP:RS, and WP:FICT. Moreschi Request a recording? 20:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiProjects Dogs[edit]

Why is this tagged as WikiProjects Dogs?

That Fenrir dude is a werewolf. Wolves are canines, so that's why--42 00:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

rodolphus and rabastan movie picture[edit]

can we get a good picture of the lestrange brothers form the movie? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 19:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Title caps[edit]

Any reason that the word "dark" is capitalized in the title and text? Exploding Boy 15:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Color Codes[edit]

Is there any significance in the color codings of the names in the infoboxes? If so, there should be a legend appended. If not, we should keep a single color code. Sniperz11 03:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It seems that confirmed Slytherins are colored in silver and green, the official colors of the Slytherin house. People whose house has never been mentioned are in black and white. Elchip 14:00, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Travers Actor[edit]

Tav Macdougall has his part in OOtP listed on his CV as "Travers" - is this acceptable sourcing with citation? --fauxcouture<T> 20:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DH update?[edit]

Possible spoiler alert.

Surely the Carrows deserve their own page now... We've also learned that Greyback is NOT a Death Eater (he doesn't have the Mark). It's also now confirmed that Yaxley is NOT "Big Blond"... that guy's name was revealed but I've forgotten it already :(

I think Grindenwald deserve his own page too, after DH

the Big blond baddie was Rowle. Sniperz11


It never mentioned that he was killed just defeated By Flitwick why dose it say he died

Because some people like to assume that if a wizard is defeated in battle, that means he is killed. It says that Dolohov "falls with a scream." That doesn't look like "Flitwick kills Dolohov" to me. All we can do is keep correcting it when people change it. Faithlessthewonderboy 12:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Aye, no kidding, people assumed Grindelwald was dead, but he turned out being quite alive. (Odd considering Rowling apparently said he was dead) Elchip 14:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It says he 'fell with a scream' to Flitwick...that indicates he was killed, especially as Rowling used the same words with 'fall' on Bellatrix, and Rowling was likely giving us Dolohov's death in exchange for Lupin. Can someone just ask Jo and put an end to all this?

Sure, I'll just call her up. Look, if he was killed, presumably Flitwick would have used the killing curse. If this is the case, he wouldn't have screamed, as the Avada Kedavra curse kills instantaneously, as we've seen with Dumbledore and Diggory. Also, go back and read the book again, it doesn't say anywhere that Bellatrix was killed. Faithlessthewonderboy 16:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gee, here I thought there was a nice section at Leaky Cauldron where one could submit questions, but silly me. Also, since when was the only way to kill someone the killing curse? Last I checked, Evan Rosier was killed by're telling me they used the killing curse? A single curse from Peter Pettigrew killed 12 Muggles...doesn't sound like the killing curse to me. Sectumsempra was capable of killing people, so are stunners....and by the same token, the article mentions Ron and Neville 'stun' Greyback...don't recall THAT mentioned in the book. Dolohov is the only Death Eater specifically mentioned as 'falling' in the middle of battle, what should that tell you? The other Death Eaters are all specifically mentioned as defeated but in situations where they'd still be alive. Somehow, it slipped JK's mind to do this for Dolohov, who'd killed someone as prominent as Lupin? And Bellatrix died. To claim otherwise is just silly. Hit by a curse? When both women were directly stated as fighting to kill? Voldemort's rage at it? claiming there's no proof or evidence is just being willfully ignorant. Bellatrix dies and anyone who can read the book would realize it.

The Leaky Cauldron is a fan site. I didn't say that it was the only way to kill someone, but it is the most common, and I said "presumably" that's what he would have used. Aurors were authorized during the first war by Crouch to kill instead of arresting, so yes it's quite likely that that's what they used. Yes, it's almost certain that Bellatrix was killed. That's not the point. What is the point is that it is not clearly stated that either Bellatrix or Dolohov are killed. That being the case, it's not appropriate to put it in an encyclopedia. On WP we can't assume anything. Faithlessthewonderboy 18:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's a fan site, so? JKR still takes questions from it and has occasionally done interviews on it. Also, considering we have indications of actual battles going on, and again there is more than one way to kill someone besides an Unforgivable Curse, seems apparent they weren't using something as dark as the AK with Rosier....there's no indication it was even used on the Prewetts. It's only not 'clearly stated' if you need to have every last little detail spelled out for you. There's nothing that says Bellatrix is ever insane, but there it is: from hints given in the book. What is the case, is that some seem to be attempting to force an interpretation down everyone else's throat while claioming there's no definite proof when all evidence points against them.

05:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)==Yaxley==

Is said he was at the First battle of Hogwarts and Harry seen him Before so he must has Been the Brutale faced Guy.

It could have been Gibbon? Elchip 14:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, not Gibbon. Gibbon was dead by the time Harry entered the castle, one of the two bodies he steps over in HBP. As well, since Harry recognizes Yaxley, it could easily be assumed that he was the brutal faced Death Eater. (Rowle, the huge blonde, was in the castle at the time.)CaydenSelwyn 05:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rookwood parts Deleted[edit]

I Deleted the part with Him fighting Dean and Parvati Because the person who stated it needs to read Pages 644 and 645 Again Because Dean is Dueling Dolohov and Parvati was dueling Travers Peeves came by droping plants on Death Eaters one it the Invivibilte Cloak a Death Eater noticed and Called to others Dean Stuned him Dolohov Was about to Retaliate but was Put in the full Body bind This being a Runing gag as it was done to him 3 other times 2 times in book 5 and 2 times in the 7th the time i am talking about and in the muggle Cafe.

Mate, I'd like to introduce you to a little thing I like to call "punctuation". You may find it comes in useful in helping people understand what the hell you're talking about. - PeeJay 11:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe we can back up and start over, primarily by rmeembering to not bite the newbies. I am sure your edits aren't without blemish. Ease up a bit and be nice. Purty please? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 06:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lupin vs. Dolohov[edit]

The article says, "It has been stated that this battle was too gruesome to include in the actual story, so it was done off screen." However, the reference given ( doesn't seem to mention that. Can anyone find it? Ophois 13:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fenrir Greyback: sexually assault Hermione?[edit]

It says right now that: "He also expresses an unhealthy interest in Hermione, go so far as to imply that he wants to sexually assault her." Yes, Fenrir Greyback did comment that he liked how Hermione's skin was soft and smooth, but I took it that he wanted to bite her, rather than sexually assault her. I'm not sure if it should be changed...Airox 06:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Um, ew. I am almost certain that Fenrir wanted to eat hermione, and that isn't code. I think some people are putting an adult spin on this that shouldn't be there. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 06:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

De-crufting complete[edit]

I have trimmed out all the cruft, the verb-tense issues and the OR. The Cruft Eaters™ strike again. You may cheer, but you may also join, and eat all the cruft you want. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 06:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Maybe he deserves his own page, he appeared quite frequently in Deathly Hallows.--Dominik92 16:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So long as you have lots and lots of citations for him outside the books themselves. Otherwise, it would be removed as per WP:UNDUE. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rookwood, based on Rockwood, a teacher who banned Potter books?[edit]

Check out this article [2] It is about a teacher named Rockwood who had Potter banned from her schools. Could her name have been used by Jo Rowling as inspiration for the Death eater Rookwood? Is there any evidence of this?Wizlop 07:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd seriously doubt it, I don't think that JKR would be that petty (and potentially libelous). She has said before that the only character that is based upon an actual person is Gilderoy Lockhart. Faithlessthewonderboy 08:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I know that Lockhart is based on a real person, but has JKR said that he's the ONLY one based on a real person, or is he the only character that she has stated being based on a real person? Chandlertalk 08:47, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The former. Here is the link. :) Faithlessthewonderboy 09:09, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not to continue this, but that link doesn't really have a date on it. She might have decided to kick the Rookwood fellow later. Frankly, I find that really unlikley. I mean, she has more money than HRH, so I imagine just going to the store is an exercise in avoiding lawsuits. 'She bumped into my shopping cart and caused whiplash! Pain and suffering!' Please, even if Rowling is that thick, the people around her by and large aren't. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 09:16, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now that I take another look at the link I posted, she described Lockhart as the only character depicting someone she had met. I guess technically that means another character could be based on someone she hadn't met. But that's just being nit-picky. Faithlessthewonderboy 09:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I was unclear. I meant perhaps the NAME was inspired by the teacher, rather than the character. A lot of Rowling's character names are "inspired." Whilst it does seem petty, it could equally be classed as appealling to Rowling's witty sense of humour. There would be Millions of people who would LOVE their name being borrowed- so she picks a person who had the books banned. However, without any evidence I guess its speculation and no more than that- the subtle change of letter avoids direct libel, I would think. But- nothing more than gossip?Wizlop 17:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(I cleaned up the spacing problem with the above post, hope no one minds :)) Gossip, I would say. The books also contain a large number of very common names (Potter, Evans, Thomas, Smith, etc.) and if one looks hard enough I'm sure there is someone in the world named Smith who has crusaded against HP. And surely there are more noteworthy people (politicians and the like) who Rowling could have parodied if that was her game. This Rockwood person appears to be of no real significance, so why would JKR single him/her out? Faithlessthewonderboy 20:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, it is possible the name was "inspired" - When choosing names Rowling might have come across this criticism from Rockwood (which WAS a big local news story,) decided she liked the name or whatever, and changed it to avoid libel. Calling a charcter "Toni Blaire" would have been far to obvious- not her style. But without proof, yeah, its just speculation. But if I ever do get the chance, I'm going to ask her- if it IS true its remarkably witty and devilish, and so ironic!Wizlop 04:54, 25 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

minor dark wizards more like minor death eaters[edit]

what the hell iss it just me or is this page just minor death eaters what ever happened to herpo the foul the first known creator of a basilisk and a parselmouth

Herpo the Foul[edit]

He just isn't notable enough to warrant inclusion. The information known about him can't possibly be stretched beyond one sentence. faithless (speak) 17:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]