Yahoo Web Search

  1. About 8,810 search results
  1. The Deathly Hallows were three highly powerful magical objects supposedly created by Death and given to each of three brothers in the Peverell family.They consisted of the Elder Wand, an immensely powerful wand that was considered unbeatable; the Resurrection Stone, a stone which could summon the spirits of the dead, and the Cloak of Invisibility, which, as its name suggests, rendered the user ...

  2. streaked out from under a parked car and flew out of sight; a shriek, a bellowed oath, and the sound of breaking china came from the Durs-leys’ living room, and as though Harry had been waiting for this signal, he jumped to his feet, at the same time pulling from the waist-band of his jeans a thin wooden wand as if he were unsheathing a sword.

    • 7MB
    • 891
  3. People also ask

    What happens in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows?

    What's the summary of the Harry Potter books?

    How did Ignotus stay hidden from death in Deathly Hallows?

    Why did Death Kill the Peverells in the Deathly Hallows?

    • NY Times
    • Plot Summary A
    • Some Stuff
    • Page Count
    • Solution to The Plot Summary Dilemma
    • Plot Summary
    • Interwiki
    • It's Just Two Days!
    • 2 Books Sold in Finland
    • Rab

    Can we at least put in info from the New York Times. Just stuff like clarification of what the deathly hallows are, and how many people die etc... I think that the NY times is a reliable source. -Mbatman 7222:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC) To everyone who read what was in this space previously: sorry you had to read that. I don't know who it was, but I find it quite sad that someone would do that. (Some twisted little fellow posted an obscene message, complete with spoilers and cursing and horrible spelling.) Happy reading! RiftDoggy00:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC) The New York Times has stated that the US book has only 759 pages, like the leaked copy from bittorrent. The summary paragraph says 784, which is wrong. 1. The sources disagree. All will be clear when the book is released, I think. — Carl (CBM · talk) 04:50, 20 July 2007 (UTC) 1.1. While I do agree that the leak in question is quite authentic, I also have to agree with Carl: all will be clear in just 24 hours or so. No need to argue ove...

    I'm currently writing a plot summary of the book; it will probably be up later this evening. It will replace the "What we know about the plot" section. Should any of that section be preserved? Titanium Dragon01:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. I don't think it's a good idea to put up a summary before the release, since we don't (as far as I know) have any confirmed sources for the plot. - Biomech talk01:09, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. 1.1. Actually we do. Many copies of the book have been mistakenly sent to people ahead of time. Stingmans01:20, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. 1.1. 1.1.1. Don't put up the plot summary. First off, there's no way to tell you have a legit plot summary. Second, it could lead to legal issues since the plot is not supposed to be revealed.-Wafulz01:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. 1.1. 1.1.1. 1.1.1.1. DO NOT put up any plot summary. It will be removed within minutes, so it would be a waste of time on your part. It will not be able to be verified before the book is released, and would be...

    this source seems to confrim that the photo book leak is at least, partly real. http://www.privet-drive.com/viewnews.php?id=430 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhang999999 (talk • contribs) 1. It may very well be; that isn't the point. It simply can't be verified until the book is released. Faithlessthewonderboy02:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. Sorry Zhang, but I think everyone agrees (and has for some time now) that copies of the book have been improperly released. This is not the issue. What is forbidden, per Wikipedia Policy, is posting, for example, a plot summary or spoilers that the rest of us cannot validate until we can check in our own authentic copies on July 21. I could claim I have a copy right now, and make up my own plot summary, and nobody could tell if it was correct or incorrect; therefore it is unverifiable and forbidden. See WP:V for the verifiability policy. --T-dot ( Talk/contribs) 02:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. 1.1. Arguing as a devil's advocate, why doesn't this...

    The New York Times review, which is now sourced late in the article, puts the number of pages at 759. (See the NYT reference which reads, 759 pages. Arthur A. Levine Books/Scholastic. $34.99 on the sidebar of the book review). This corroborates with one of the leaks, which is a series of digital images that is known to be spreading through peer to peer and BitTorrent networks and shows the page count at 759. The Scholastic press release cited earlier (Reference 8) says the book is 784 pages, however, this may be the total page count including blank pages, about the author page, about the illustrator, table of contents, dedication, copyright, title page, etc. The numbered pages end at 759 according to the New York Times and the one leak. Which number ought to be used? Shouldn't it be 759? --Ademine11:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. Different versions (adult, child), different editions (US, UK). Isn't it really kind of useless unless you specify, or at least include all the figures? Liu Bei...

    Well, Friday is fast upon us. Someone should simply prepare a plot synopsis offline and post it immediately at the official release time. As a side note, it's not "illegal" to disclose information about the book before its release- book sellers were simply entered into binding contracts with Bloomsbury and Scholastic. A publisher can't make it illegal for anyone to disclose a summary of their copyrighted works- doing so violates the first amendment. So you need verifiability? Someone ought to link to a JPG of the last paragraph or so- and simply note that this is the plot of one of the texts purported to be book 7. It's fair use to quote a paragraph of a book- and it's verifiable (verifiably a purported leak). No, we can't go posting every page of the book here, but if it's fair use to quote a section, it's fair use to take a picture of that (and only that) section when quoting to verify that such text is indeed a part of a purported leak.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tymothy...

    Well, Ive been reading the discussion for quite a while now and been holding off on expressing my opinion until I was sure that it all made sense. So, heres the finished version of it: First, I'd like to say that I'd love nothing more than for there to be NO plot summary on this page because I wish to adhear to Rowlings wishes, however Wikipedia is not cencored and thus doesnt obey the wishes of others. The main issue here seems to be the "verifiable information" hang up. Its been announced that a possible 1200 books made it out. That means that it is definately possible for someone to write a plot summary and for other editors to come in behind them (who have access to the book as well) and revise the summary. At this point we should be treating the book as no different than a sold-out limited-edition book. Just because EVERY editor cant get their hands on this book doesnt mean there arent editors out there who can and are able to add to this article. Many are wary to allow such ed...

    Please, can anyone add to the interwiki: gl:Harry Potter e as reliquias mortais? Thanks. --83.36.196.13019:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. Done.-Wafulz19:55, 19 July

    Yeah, we know it's just two days. And it's not that big of a deal. So why does everyone who thinks two days doesn't make that big of a difference keep saying "it's just two days"? If two days doesn't make a difference to you in having a Plot Summary added to the article, then I suggest you stop worrying about it being added two days eariler. If you feel that a Plot Summary should not be added to this article due to Wiki policy, then please, state that. The amount of time until the product is released doesn't really have any influence in this situation. Thanks. 71.171.184.17920:09, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. Your argument makes no sense. You are comparing 48 hours till a release date and the insertion of a spoiler-ridden plot summary. I could simply use the same logic back at you and assert that if 2 days doesn't make a difference, then why bother putting in a plot summary early? GoatSmoke20:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC) Again, the amount of time and the fact that they're "spoilers" should not m...

    In case someone finds this interesting... It was on the news today that two copies of HP and Deathly Hallows have mistakenly been sold also in Finland (and for price less than 20 euros, while those who had pre-ordered it will have to pay about 30 euros). Do you know has this kind of mistake happened anywhere else besides US and Finland? Here is a link to news by Finnish Broadcasting Company YLE: I haven't found that in English yet but I will look for it. Is this big enough news to mention in the article? :) Music-melody21:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. Seems reasonably important. After the dust settles, we should have a section dedicated to leaks and early deliveries.-Wafulz21:55, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

    (Also posed same q there) What happens o the RAB article one HP7 comes out? Simply south22:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 1. It gets re-written as well. Some of the existing material regarding it being a significant mystery in the series for 2 years would still be notable. Most of the speculation and rationalization on why it might have been this or that character would probably be considered moot, and would tend to whither away in time. It would probably be good to keep it as a separate article, rather than merging - just as Tom Riddle and Lord Voldemort are separate. --T-dot ( Talk/contribs) 22:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

  4. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone is the first installment of the popular Harry Potter book series by J.K. Rowling. It follows the events of Harry Potter's first year at Hogwarts. This novel works as an introduction to the world of magic. The story plays in the perspective of Harry Potter, who is also just discovering magic.

  5. Harry Potter and the Cursed Child is an original Harry Potter franchise play, authored by J. K. Rowling, John Tiffany, and Jack Thorne. Despite much assumption to the contrary, J. K. Rowling had insisted that the story of the play was not a prequel to the story of Harry Potter, and eventually...

    • 2 min
  6. Jul 18, 2011 · Harry Potter - a brief summary on the books. The Potter Series is a magical world of love, fun, romance, hate, curse and rebirth. The young potter acted by Daniel Radcliffe saw himself growing up along with these series with his close pals Ron Weasley (acted by Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (acted by Emma Watson).