Talk:Bellatrix Lestrange (character)

Bella & Voldy

anyone get the idea that she's in love w/ him? I certainly did(esp. the My Lord... My Lord(about 5 times in book 7)thing). 75.4.70.10 18:58, 15 August 2007 (UTC)eddisford

Yep. It was pretty clear throughout DH, and then Jo confirmed Bella's love for Voldemort in that chat. TakaraLioness 03:39, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

But can someone confirm this line

Often times, she would show her loyalty to the Dark Lord by means of sexual pleasure.

because I can't find any reference in the interview linked which says anything of the sort. That she was in love, yes; but sexual pleasure? Whassallthaddabout? Wooster (talk) 10:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Fancruft, I think that's the word for it. TakaraLioness 15:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

HA!! yes, i knew it!! (what about rodolphus?ha.)I thought this was it all along but i didn't know if my hyper imagination was being hyperer than usual.about the sexual pleasure thing..never heard anything about it but i definetly(ok how do i spell that? argh.)thought that..would have brought it up w/ my friends but that's not really the sort of thing we like to talk about.Eddisford 23:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Dead or captured?

Can I have a citation please?

• I think you seriously need to read the last chapter again if you believe Molly didn't kill her. "Aiming to kill", fall of Voldemort's last best luietenant, ect. She so obviosly died, otherwise she would have been revived by Voldemort and Voldemort would not have gone after Molly.

Well, it's all on page 736 of the U.S. edition of the book... It's pretty much implied that she was killed. Even the other Wikipedia articles have her in the death list. TakaraLioness 18:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

That's just it though, isn't it? It's implied that she was killed. But never stated conclusively. She may have just been severely injured and returned to Azkaban. Until JKR talks about it in an interview, we have to assume that she's alive. Faithlessthewonderboy 21:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I suppose that's true. I also suppose that the other articles stating that she's dead will need to be informed. TakaraLioness 22:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm doing my best! :P It's tough, especially at Molly Weasley. People like to make assumptions and then try to add them to Wikipedia. Nothing we can do except reverting their edits. Faithlessthewonderboy 04:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Make ASSUMPTIONS???!!! Bella is DEAD! Accept it1

You're right. I just re-read my copy of Deathly Hallows; somehow, I missed the line that said, "Molly killed Bellatrix." But yes, assumptions. Look up the word; technically, we're both making an assumption, regardless of who is right. The difference is, there is so far no proof that your assumption is correct, and therefore it is unacceptable to add it to Wikipedia. Oh, and "accept it?" It's not like I'm in some kind of denial, I don't care if she's dead. We just don't know yet. Stop reading between the lines. Faithlessthewonderboy 20:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, with any luck, Jo'll clear it all up in due time... TakaraLioness 23:54, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's hope so! :] Faithlessthewonderboy 00:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I think she's dead. Both women aiming to kill, Harry knowing what was about to happen, the comparison to Sirius' death, and Voldemort being angry because of "The fall of his lieutenant", all indicate that Bella is dead. I think that you're taking all this stuff way too literal. Lord Opeth 01:17, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Kind of like how people thought that Sirius and Dumbledore weren't really dead. TakaraLioness 01:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

There is very little doubt in my mind that she is dead. But Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and every bit of information has to be verifiable, and this simply is not. Plain and simple, Rowling never said that Bellatrix died. Did she? Almost certainly. But this isn't the place for reading between the lines. If it isn't stated explicitly, it doesn't belong. Faithlessthewonderboy 02:39, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

How about someone write 'presumably killed?' Why should there even be cause for debate? DH clearly says both women fought to kill and we see Bellatrix hit in the chest by a CURSE. Not only that, she was hit right above the heart-even a stunning spell could kill her then, and Voldemort's rage? There's a 99.999999 percent chance Bella died

Writing that she was "presumably killed" is speculative, and therefore doesn't belong. Yes, she was hit by a curse...so? And in the previous book the elderly McGonogall was hit by four stunning spells at once and managed to survive, so where's the rationale saying that such a spell could kill Bellatrix. No one is saying that she isn't dead, but it is never stated that she is. Only information that is 100% verifiable belongs in an encyclopedia. 99.999999% isn't good enough. Faithlessthewonderboy 16:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

It did all but scream that she was dead and I don't believe stunners were ever referred to as 'curses.' You have them both fighting to kill, and Molly wins, what does that tell you? It's simple logic: Bella is dead.

That is an assumption. Correct though it may be (and almost certainly is), it is still an assumption. And on WP we are interested in verifiability, not truth. WP:V Faithlessthewonderboy 18:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

No, it really isn't an assumption. It's simple logic.

Well, until Jo states that she's dead, Wikipedia'll have to assume she's not (and change its other articles to say that she's not dead)... TakaraLioness 22:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Why do we have to 'assume' anything? If she was alive, Jo would have mentioned it in the novel. She's shown losing a fight to the death which was clearly described as such.

I hope that Rowling gives an interview and specifically states that she's dead, and soon. But until then, the assumption is in saying that she's dead, not the other way around. You're right, Rowling doesn't tell us she's still alive, but that's not the point. She doesn't tell us Cho Chang survived either, so should we say that she's dead? No. The last we saw of Bellatrix, she was alive and until stated otherwise, that's what this article should say. Faithlessthewonderboy 22:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Trying to force your opinion down peoples' throats when truth contradicts you is just plain foolish. She's shown losing a duel to the death-where both combatants are FIGHTING TO KILL, verifiable enough for you? She's shown struck with a CURSE-things that tend to be fatal when fired in death duels... So, all the evidence points to her death. YOU are making an assertion she's alive. Where's the burden of proof? The article should state her as killed, because that's what she clearly was. Oh, and unlike Cho Chang, Bellatrix was defeated in what was described as a fight with both people aiming to kill with a direct comparison to Sirius's death. You want to make an argument for her being alive? I'd love to hear it.

As I've said time and again, I have very little doubt that she is dead. Unfortunately, the book simply does not say if she was killed. Yes, it says they were fighting to the death; does that mean that the duel inevitable ended with one killing the other? Surely it would have had Bellatrix won, but would Molly go out of her way to kill her opponent if it wasn't necessary? We don't know what spell she was hit with; is it beyond the realm of possibility that Molly hit her with a stunning spell (or something similar) that knocked her out, and eliminated the need for murder? I don't think so. Again, this is admittedly far-fetched, but per WP:V WP is concerned with verifiability, not truth. Surely we have seen other duels to the death which did not end in a death: Harry and Voldemort in the graveyard in GoF, Dumbledore and Voldemort in OotP, etc. And wouldn't you say that every one of the duels that took place at the Battle of Hogwarts was a duel to the death? I doubt any of the Death Eaters would have hesitated to kill anyone they were fighting. And since we never hear of most of their fates, who's to say they're still alive? The burden of proof is on those asserting their belief that she is dead. Where has it been conclusively, 100% stated? It hasn't yet, that I know of. Hopefully JKR will soon tell us that she is dead, but until that happens, the book is just too vague. And let's not get personal. I'm not "trying to force [my] opinion down peoples' throats" nor am I being "foolish." Faithlessthewonderboy 04:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The book DOES say she was killed. It's obvious from the text. It says clearly 'Both women were fighting to kill.' As in 'Molly is also fighting to kill Bellatrix.; Also, the stunning spell is never described as a 'curse.' This is seriously reaching for your point. Also, when was any other of those duels to the death ever described with BOTH opponents fighting to kill? In fact, Dumbledore says he won't kill Tom: "Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit..." We kinda see Harry is clearly not trying to kill Voldemort in GoF-he uses Expelliarmus, instead of those unforgivable curses he'd learned... The burden of proof, I'm afraid, still rests upon you, since you're claiming there's 'no proof' Bella died when that's not true. I'm afraid this is forcing an opinion down other peoples' throats by apparently refusing to even look at ANYTHING the book doesn't say in huge bold letters The book isn't vague whatsoever. It says clearly this is a duel to the death. It says and I quote: "Both women were fighting to kill." It harkens clearly to Harry remembering the death of Sirius when Bella gets overconfident and realizing what's about to happen, Bella is struck on her chest by a curse from a woman described as fighting to kill. Voldemort goes into a rage at Bella's 'fall'-since when would 'fall' mean anything but a death in a pitched battle to the death? It's plain ridiculous to claim the book doesn't assert she was killed. With this, the burden of proof is clearly upon anyone who claims there's doubt on the matter. We don't have any other Death Eaters- Dolohov aside- whose defeats are written in a manner to show a decisively fatal end, either, so that argument is very weak. Again: seems that the burden of proof is on the detractors here....tell me, how does your 'possible' explanation make any sense when just a paragraph or two before, Molly was described as fighting to kill Bellatrix and hits her with a curse? A stunning spell is not described as a curse...in fact, most of the 'fatal' spells tend to be curses...it's clear and definite Bellatrix died. Everyone who has read the book knows this. Honestly, I'm sorry if I come across as rude, I don't mean to be at all. It just seems odd to me there's any controversy on this. That they were both aiming to kill one another should at the least be mentioned in the article

Don't sweat it, I'm sure you weren't being intentionally rude. We just have to remember that we are arguing about a children's book, after all. :P I've tried to make this clear, but perhaps I'm still not getting it across so I'll repeat it: I am not arguing that Bellatrix is alive! But for inclusion in WP, a fact has to be stated conclusively with absolutely no room for interpretation. If you or another editor would like to include that they were described as fighting to the death, I'd be fine with that. But it just isn't stated that she's dead, no matter how obvious it is. As far as the stunning spell goes, I was using that as an example (and that's why I also said "or something similar"). I think we agree that Molly used the Avada Kedavra and killed Bellatrix. But it just doesn't say that. It's equally plausible that Molly caught her with a curse that knocked her unconscious; this would have caused her to "fall" and would have enraged Voldemort, since he would then be fighting alone. Again, I don't believe this to be the case, but as there are two possible we can't just pick the one we think is more likely, we need to wait until JKR tells us exactly what happened. Verifiability, not truth WP:V. As for Dolohov, that's a whole other can of worms. I would actually argue that he is not dead; it says that he "[fell] with a scream at Flitwick's hands." What suggests that he was killed? But that's a whole other story...

As for Dumbledore and Voldemort, of course killing Voldemort wouldn't have satisfied him, after everything he had done! Does that mean he wasn't prepared to kill him? Surely he wouldn't have just let him be taken off to Azkaban. As a compromise, why don't we word the article to say something like "It is unclear whether the curse with which Molly hits Bellatrix is fatal." Faithlessthewonderboy 17:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I get that you don't believe Bella's alive, but that it's not verifiable that she's dead seems a bit odd to me...there doesn't seem to be any room for interpretation, save a few people who theorize she's alive...there are also people who theorized Ron was Dumbledore, that Harry and Hermione were siblings, etc... As for Dolohov: Dolohov is stated as 'falling with a scream' at Flitwick's hands. Since we both agree, outside of the debate, that Bella is dead, 'fall' is used to specify that she's dead...we know Dolohov killed fan favorite Lupin, and that 'falling' at someone's hands in the middle of a pitched battle can leave little interpretation. Rowling never uses such a term with the other Death Eaters. Rookwood is 'stunned', Yaxley is 'slammed to the ground'...Dolohov is the only high profile Death Eater whose defeat is described in such a way and his 'scream' seems to indicate a death cry. As for Molly and her curse: DH's text does clearly state Molly was fighting to kill and hits Bella with a curse. Stunning spells are never referred to as 'curses.' If Bella was just knocked out, Voldemort could easily have used a spell to reinvigorate her. Again: It doesn't just say a duel to the death...it says Molly Weasley is fighting to kill, as is Bellatrix. That alone should provide verifiability that Bellatrix is dead. If we compromise, then we should put that Molly is fighting to kill Bellatrix, because a lot of people might be confused by the ambiguity of such a clear subject

I know that direct quotes are generally to be avoided, but how about we directly quote the relevant passage, thereby taking our interpretation out of it and letting the reader see exactly what Rowling wrote and make up their own mind? As for Dolohov, the "falling with a scream" line indicates to me that he survived. AK is the only curse we know of that would cause instant death, and those hit with it don't scream, they simply die. I would say that it's far more likely that Flitwick used a body bind curse or something of that nature to incapacitate him, but not kill him. And sure, there were tons of baseless theories floating around, but there was never anything to suggest that Dumbledore was a time traveling Ron (aside from both having red hair, I guess); on the other hand, Bella was obviously very much alive, so even if we think she's dead, it's not completely ridiculous to argue that she's alive (just mostly ;)). Faithlessthewonderboy 22:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Which passage are you mentioned? And as we saw with Neville in Sorcerer's Stone, a Full Body Bind renders you no time to so much as scream-same with Harry in HBP, the vocak cords are also paralyzed...we know there're other ways to kill someone than an AK, but in a pitched battle, if a high profile Death Eater who killed a beloved character falls with a scream, that implicates some rigor mortis in his near future...there are also other curses that we've seen can be fatal-Sectum Sempra for one....and we have mentions of Aurors killing Death Eaters, and I doubt they used the AK to do it. And given he's the Charms professor, Flitwick could do anything from flying a knife into Dolohov or just used a fatal spell....and except for Aberforth and Arthur Weasley. whose opponents were merely stunned, Flitwick is the only adult to finish a Death Eater. And honestly, I think your directly quoting the relevant passage, or close to there as we can get, is a good idea....also on the matte

To be fair, we've never seen Sectum Sempra kill anyone. And while it certainly could, it would be a slow, agonizing death. The fact of the matter is that there are probably hundreds (if not thousands) of spells, curses and jinxes out there, and we know of very few. And sure, Flitwick could have killed Dolohov in any number of ways, but I don't think that means he did. There are other ways to incapacitate an opponent, and I can't see little Flitwick murdering someone unnecessarily. He could have used the Cruciatus Curse, for instance. And we're told that during the first war that Crouch Sr authorized Aurors to use the Unforgivable Curses, so I'm sure that many a Death Eater saw the business end of the AK. Well I don't have the time right now, but later this afternoon I'll write something up with the direct quote and post it here on the talk page to see what others think. Faithlessthewonderboy 17:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course, I don't mean to say Flitwick used Sectumsempra...however, it could be used to slash one's throat, or go for a quick kill...in a master hand, like Snape's? Not comparable to a quick clumsy attack by Harry. And Flitwick, I remind you, is a Hogwarts professor, a dueling champion and was a friend of Remus Lupin, the man Dolohov killed earlier. And given the 'dark' nature of the AK, do you really see men like Moody or Kingsly using it on another human being? And NP, take your time -Also, Faithless...perhaps we should change a bit of Dolohov's bio to reflect the current controversy? There is evidence going that he's dead, and that he's a live....we can't automatically assume one since both are unverifiable as it stands...we should have the article reflect the controversy and let readers make up their own minds.

Well that's actually the reason why I like stating (in both cases) that the characters (Bella & Dolohov) were defeated rather than killed, because whether they are alive or dead, saying that they were defeated is true either way. On the other hand saying that they're dead is being very specific and doesn't allow any wriggle room. I mean, we both agree that Bella is dead; but saying that Molly defeated her is just as accurate, right? And I'm willing to bend on Bella because honestly there is plenty of reason to believe that she's dead, but I'm afraid I'd still have to fight you on Dolohov. I know there are plenty of people who think he is dead, but I just really don't think there's any evidence pointing to Antonin's death. He wasn't described as fighting to the death and he screamed when he fell, so we know that at least he didn't die right away. Anything more is just speculating. So while we can work on Bellatrix, I think for the sake of accuracy as well as brevity, we should stick with saying that Dolohov was defeated. As for your other comment, are you suggesting that the tiny, elderly schoolteacher is capable of murder, but the grizzled old battle tested Auror isn't!? :P BTW, I'm still going to work on what we talked about, I've just come down with a bug and have been neglecting my Wiki-ing for the past couple days. Faithlessthewonderboy 07:20, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but when we list people like Rookwood and Greyback as merely 'defeated', confusion does arise. 'Defeat' only means that they lost the battle, but doesn't really cover the status of alive or dead and given the controversy, it's likely to cause serious confusion. And on Dolohov, consider this: We both agree Bella is dead. The evidence for Dolohov is the falling with a scream...now, I'm certain Moody would kill a Death Eater-he helped kill Rosier- but using the Avada Kedavra on them? When he was praised as never sinking to the level Crouch brought other Aurors to? I also doubt Flitwick and Moody would see killing an enemy in the middle of a raging battle as murder.I think the evidence for Antonin's death, though, has more for it then against it, not least of which: 1. He's the only one described as 'falling' in the battle...except Bellatrix, who was very likely killed 2. Flitwick, as a dueling master and Charms expert wouldn't need to, or want to use dark magic as the Avada Kedavra to kill him 3. A scream has often been used to mean a death scream, when you fall at someone's hands. 4. Dolohov's the man who killed Remus Lupin....would Jo really just carelessly write him off in such an ambiguous way where he can go back to Azkaban-a place he endured for over a decade with the Dementors, nevermind when they've been removed. At the very least, it's quite a piece of controversy that I hope JK'll confirm sooner or later. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 132.170.37.67 (talk) 15:17:30, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

"Defeated" is insufficient. The description in the book so clearly implies death that it's ridiculous that the wikipedia article cannot reflect it. Either the article should state "presumed dead" or an entire section should describe the reasoning behind her status. Considering there's only one person on this discussion with the view than she isn't dead, I think that's unnecessary. I'll let this sit for a little while and see other's opinions, but the article is insufficiently clear as written and needs clarification. Either "presumed dead" or a more detailed description is required. Agrippina Minor 21:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) I assume you're saying I'm the only one taking the view that she's not dead? If you had actually read the discussion, you would have seen that I'm not saying she's alive. The fact is that this topic has been discussed to death (here and elsewhere), and consensus has been reached. Look through the history and you'll see that many editors have reverted edits when an IP comes along and inserts that Bellatrix is dead. It's never stated conclusively in the books, and Wikipedia is concerned with verifiability, not truth. faithless (^speak) 21:48, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

My last edit said "In a duel to the death, an enraged Molly Weasley rushes forth to fight Bellatrix herself and fires a curse that finally defeats Bellatrix." It was undone by someone who said there was no evidence that Ballatrix was killed. However, if you look at how I worded it, I put it in exactly the sale manner it was portrayed by Rowling. We've already established that both women were fighting to kill, we know Molly won, but Rowling doesn't explicitly say Bellatrix dies. WELL MY POST DID'T EITHER. I think it was the most accurate portrayal. As written, the article fails to mention that they were fighting to kill. It's dishonest. Agrippina Minor —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 19:43, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Please don't "yell." I'm sure I don't have to tell you that using all caps is considered rude. As for your edit, I thought it was fair enough, which is why I didn't change it. You might want to talk it out with the editor who changed it. But I wouldn't say that the article is "dishonest." Bellatrix was defeated, wasn't she? faithless (^speak) 20:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

It's dishonest by ommission, because it failed to mention that the characters were fighting to kill. I'm glad we've reached consensus (at least the two of us). Agrippina Minor —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 16:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

State of Mind

I have removed this section because it is lengthy speculation on the character's mental state and true relationship with Voldemort. The first paragraph is literally a user-created argument over whether she's insane or lucid. The second makes a case for devaluing her realtionship with Voldemort, with various additions that suggest she may be just as close as she says.

The evaluation of these questions should be left to reputable, critical interpretation appearing in print media. It is not Wikipedians' place to do this. I suggest any information that is deemed vital to the article be re-inserted in a proper place.

Although Bellatrix's state of mind before her imprisonment is not fully described, she now appears to be of unsound mind. In the Department of Mysteries, Bellatrix took ghoulish delight in recounting her crime against the Longbottoms and subsequently torturing their son, Neville. She mocked Harry Potter in a false baby voice, and was easily provoked (a temper that seems to run in her family). Bellatrix also seems paranoid; while following her sister to Spinner's End, she impulsively killed a fox for fear that it was an Animagus spy. As a whole, however, her appearance in Half-Blood Prince seems to suggest a greater degree of lucidity: she demonstrates intelligence and the capacity for critical thought in her interrogation of Severus Snape at Spinner's End (despite being easily antagonised by Snape). Her speech is passionate and at times erratic (at one point she is described as appearing 'slightly mad') and it is also clear that her views and morals remain deeply skewed. Bellatrix's behaviour is unquestionably twisted and cruel, but it is not necessarily indicative of insanity.

Bellatrix is also fanatically devoted to Voldemort. In Half-Blood Prince Bellatrix evidenced a pitiless disdain for Narcissa's concern for Draco when she expressed that she would have been proud - if she had a son - for him to enter into the Dark Lord's service. Bellatrix also feels that she is one of the Dark Lord's closest associates. During her duel with Harry in the Ministry of Magic, she asserted "I was and am the Dark Lord's most loyal servant, I learned the Dark Arts from him, and I know spells of such power, that you, pathetic little boy, can never hope to compete." She also splutters in her meeting with Snape at Spinners End that "The Dark Lord has, in the past, entrusted me with his most precious-", though she never clarifies this further. However, there is growing evidence that Bellatrix is not as close to Voldemort as she would like:

• Bellatrix did not know about the prophecy until after Voldemort's defeat.
• In Order of the Phoenix she was enraged to hear Harry call Voldemort a half-blood, suggesting she may not have known his blood-status - though her subsequent unwavering loyalty leaves room for the possibility that she was merely angry at him for blaspheming her master.
• When Bellatrix conversed with Snape at his home, she was visibly flustered and defensive when he insinuated that Voldemort was keeping information from her.

Despite this withholding of information, Voldemort refers to her by the pet name "Bella". Dumbledore speculates that although many Death Eaters think themselves close to the Dark Lord, Voldemort conceals the fact that he maintains guarded relationships with his followers, essentially seeing them as tools.

Picture?

Could we find a picture of Bellatrix either a drawing from the books or a screenshot from the upcoming movie? Its not that I don't like the fan art, I just think a "real" picture of Bellatrix would be better. Clamster5 20:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

similarities between cruella de vil

i think there's a lot of similarities between her and cruella de vil, that movie image shows alot of that. what do you think?

No, because it's speculation. 68.162.169.173

Speculation removal

"(suggesting that the Common Laws preventing material gain through murder do not apply to wizards, or at least to the Black Family)"

This should be removed, as it is "in universe" speculation about whether wizarding law/practice supersedes muggle law. (If I asked for a citation, nothing could be provided to back it up!) It contains the weasel word "suggesting", which might as well be replaced with "I think" or "I'm guessing that". It is also completely irrelevant, because even if this statment is true it holds no bearing on the plot - this idea is not engaged at this point of the novel at all - or the subject of the article (Bellatrix). 68.162.169.173 01:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

How about this: "If this is the case, then British Common Law cannot apply to the wizarding world (or at least the Black Family), since that expressly precludes a murderer from inheriting from their victim." Since that is nothing less than a statement of fact (and relates to whether Bellatrix could legally inherit anyway). Michaelsanders 01:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Or: "Strictly, under British Common Law, she couldn't inherit anyway." Michaelsanders 01:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

It is still irrelevant because the question of "whether Bellatrix could legally inherit [under British Common Law]" is never engaged by the novel. (And in truth, this plot point about inheritance doesn't need much airtime. Bellatrix was barely involved despite being a key part, and the consequences of her inheritance never came to fruition. What is in the article - sans the above quoted sentence - suffices.) If I started adding useless clarifications like this to every Harry Potter article, my IP would be banned! The fact that one registered person desperatly wants their thought in the article does not mean it should be included. We're supposed to be concise and informative in our writing for Wikipedia, not verbose, meandering, or speculative. 68.162.169.173 01:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Pale?

Are you sure that she was pale? I distinctly recall that she was mentioned in the book as "dark". --KnowledgeLord 05:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

She is described as both pale and "as dark as her sister is fair". Thus, it's not clear whether her complexion is light or dark. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.49.145.131 (talk) 19:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

When it says dark it's referring to her hair. Unless they have seperate fathers brothers and sisters will always ahve the same skin colour albeit different skin tones.

Anon

Basically JK means she can get a nice tan when she wants to Niyant 01:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Bellatrix's lines

I was just wondering how you guys know Helena was joking when she said that about her lines. So she does have more than five lines in the film then. (Bigred03 03:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC))

I used the word 'joked' because I didn't think people would understand the word 'hyperbolized', although I own that it is not the best descriptor. I think it's pretty clear that she was exaggerating how much of her role was cut. I'll change it now, for precision of language. 68.162.131.231 15:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Original research, unrelated 'see also' links

Linking Esmé Squalor in Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events to Bellatrix is original research and thus is not permitted in Wikipedia. Stop repeatedly adding this and other unrelated information (Ursa) to this article. I know you're interested in the parallels between these characters, but you can't force your interests and speculations into encyclopedia entries. 68.162.131.231 15:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Of course what you have failed to take into account is that Wikipedia articles frequently have the names of similar characters listed in the "See also" section. The See also section in "The Master" article contains links to General Zod and Doctor Mabuse, the "See also" section in the Ra's al Ghul article has links to Fu Manchu and Fantomas, the "See Also" in the Yerk article has a link to the Goa'uld article. Esme Squalor and Ursa are similar characters to Bellatrix and so warrent a mention in the "See also" section. This is not original research at all.

YourLord

You have failed to take into account that these characters were first integrated into the article itself in a manner which was clearly original research. Also, linking to these characters in no way enriches this article as they are wholly unrelated to the subject (Bellatrix). "Ursa" led to a disambiguation page, not even a "related" character! It's clearly just some fan trying to force Snicket's characters into another article based on their own drawing of unsubstantiated parallels. 151.201.134.209 00:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, perhaps I did not make my point clear enough. When I said that they were similar characters I meant similar to Bellatrix, not to each other. All three of them are powerful but vicious women who are trusted minions of an evil male villain.

YourLord

Demon link removed from Norwegian translation

I removed the link to article about Demons in the translated Norwegian version of her name, as DeMons is not in any way related to demons in the Norwegian language - it's just a common name. (90.149.131.145 18:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC))

Suggested Removal

A Girl I met recently is a witch. yes they are real. Bellatrix is her role model. and Voldemort and Snape and Bellatrix are after her so she can become like them!

Need I say more?

Striking out ridiculous comment. Ccrashh 15:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Good for you.

This put a smile on my face. :] Faithlessthewonderboy 16:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

First Shown in Goblet of Fire

The summary box states that she first appears in the Order of the Phoenix, however she is featured in the trial of the death eaters for the torture of Neville's parents in the flashback Harry sees in the pensieve bowl in Dubledore's office. That should be fixed. I will wait and see if anyone has anything to say. It is even quoted in the first endnote as her quote in the Goblet of Fire. Agrippina Minor 18:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Siriuck.JPG

Image:Siriuck.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 14:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Why is this article protected?

Bitch

Is it really worth mentioning that Molly Weasley called her a bitch? Faithlessthewonderboy 05:22, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Probably not, though that was a great line. I think it's just worth mentioning the fact that Molly and Bella were dueling to the death, etc, etc. TakaraLioness 15:54, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

What was she doing when she kept repeating "My Lord".

No clue. I did find it very interesting though... Perhaps she was just trying to wake him up, since something did happen to him? I dunno. She did try to assist him in getting back on his feet, it seems, so maybe... Oh well. I guess we'll never know. TakaraLioness 03:33, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I still think she's in love with him.Eddisford 00:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

That was definitely a great line; Molly went all Sigourney Weaver, Aliens style! "Get away from her you BITCH!" 79.73.193.183 18:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

isnt "it not my daughter you bitch"?

Yes, that's Bella's line, but the "Get away from her" line is the one from Aliens. TakaraLioness 17:11, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Google Spoiler

When searching for this characters name, there is a rather ghastly spoiler (link: http://www.google.com.au/search?q=bellatrix+lestrange&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a_ "Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix Lestrange casts the Avada Kedavra curse on Sirius Black in the film Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix ..."

I think it should be fixed... Kuzmaster 09:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Hm... Okay... I'll change it. TakaraLioness 14:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Residence

Do we know that she was living at Malfoy Manor? Faithlessthewonderboy 09:00, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I suppose not, but she was always there... And she did tell Voldemort that it was an honor to have him in "our family's home." TakaraLioness 18:07, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

And she was teaching Draco Occlumency

She also knew that Narcissa was going to Snape's to tell him about Draco's mission. She also appears in all the scenes of the Manor. Lord Opeth 18:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Good points all, but it's still speculation. Faithlessthewonderboy 22:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Name?

I'm wondering if there is a specific meaning behind her name, as there is of so many Harry Potter characters. If I recall correctly, isn't the name Trixie derived from a latin term for a whore? That would make her name "beautiful whore".

Bellatrix's name means "warrior" in Latin. It's there in the article, in the Early Life section, I think. TakaraLioness 03:04, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Like almost every other Black, Bellatrix is named after a constellation. Faithlessthewonderboy 07:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Hair Colour and Eye Colour

What on Earth?! Eye colo(u)r and hair colo(u)r are missing from all HP characters; how, when and why?

I have absolutely no idea... Please sign your posts. TakaraLioness 05:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Those facts don't belong in infoboxes, they are too trivial. Faithlessthewonderboy 22:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

*Cough cough* Harry Potter *cough cough cough* Keyblade Mage 23:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Images

There are currently two images of just Bellatrix from the Order of the Phoenix film. Clearly, this goes beyond the scope of fair use. My thought is to delete the one that is not in the infobox (Image:Bellatrix_HD.jpg). Anyone else? -Phi*n!x —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 03:24, August 24, 2007 (UTC). Hmm, very true. I agree we should just keep the one in the infobox. Redfur —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.174.178 (talk) 22:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

If no objections are raised, I will nominate Image:Bellatrix_HD.jpg for deletion by September 12. -Phi*n!x 19:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm all for getting rid of the non-infbox one. It is a horrible picture and adds little to the article. asyndeton 15:22, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

The image has been used for a very long time. I see no reason for nominating it. Lord Opeth 01:48, 17 September 2007 (UTC)