Talk:Ordinary Wizarding Level

Too much detail...

This article is approaching the level of the "detail-oriented" edits we've all come to know and love. If we must have Harry's, Ron's, and Hermione's OWL results, I'd rather these results go into the specific articles for these characters. What do you think? --Deathphoenix 02:56, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Muggle equivalents

Where do these come from? I'm removing them straight away, both from this page and from NEWT.Pruneau 23:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

The article needs something about the name being a take-off from the British 'Ordinary Level'; I don't know enough myself. —wwoods 08:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Is "O.W.L." always pronounced 'Oh-Double-U-Ell', or is it sometimes as an acronym: 'Owl'? —wwoods 08:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

It was almost certainly meant to be heard as "Owls" - i.e. the acronym sounding like a magical creature. For the "NEWTS" as well.

Yoda921 11:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Yoda

OWL or O.W.L.

There have been several edits and reverts to this page and to NEWT over the last few days, about the spelling: O.W.L. or OWL? The thing is, both spellings are used in the books: HBP uses O.W.L., OotP uses OWL, and GoF uses O.W.Ls (only two full stops).

In the first books, it was spelled OWL in the old versions, but is spelled O.W.L. in the new (British) versions. The fact that the most recent book uses O.W.L., and that there have been corrections from OWL to O.W.L. makes me think that we should keep the full stops. If you disagree, please answer here rather than just reverting. Thanks. Pruneau^T 10:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I disagree, the abbreviation O.W.L. is not natural for most people (including British, Australians, and even Americans — they generally leave stops out after two letters, eg, U.S., but CIA, FBI, USA, etc). In standard Australian and British usage, stops are hardly ever used or encountered these days for abbreviations. I don't think we can really trust these books with regards to spelling, grammar and abbreviations. There are places in these books where, for example, realise is spelt "realize" but in other places "realise". The grammar is not so crash hot in a few places either. The abbreviations, well, in some books using stops whereas in others not using stops for three-or-more letter abbreviations, and that the most recent book using O.W.L. means nothing, its just an editor's decision to use stops, but it doesn't mean that OWL is incorrect. IMHO, to me O.W.L. looks ugly and awkward. 203.164.189.245 14:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I never said OWL is incorrect. Obviously, both spellings are correct. What seems relevant to me is the spelling JKR prefers. I agree that in the books, it is plausible that the editors changed something; however, I think no one edits what she writes on her website, and she apparently prefers to use stops in exam names there: [1]. Pruneau^T 15:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I've added the non-stop abbreviation after the stop abbreviation as both versions exist in the books. But the stop abbreviation is still used as the primary one throughout the article, as it was used in the latest book. Hopefully this will keep everyone happy. Also done this for NEWT. Cheers. 203.94.135.134 22:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Contradictions?

In HP book 3 Fred & George Weasley have their OWL exam. They get their results the same time Harry gets his for his normal school exams - still in the schooldays. Harry on the other hand gets his results in the holidays (in book 6). It seems JKR made a mistake here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.189.212.101 (talk) 14:07, August 22, 2007 (UTC)