Preliminary Lupin

[carolynwhite2]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" 
<quigonginger at y...> wrote:
> Hi.  
> Delving into the Lupin category, I have checked out the acronyms, 
and 
> found them to be either empty (not invented yet) or very small.  

You need to refer to the InishAlley listing for the source post. I 
just ran my eye down the list and the oldest Lupin acronym seems to 
be post 57900 (SLURP), and the majority are in the 28000-39000 group 
of posts, so we should have picked them all up by now.

This is an interesting first test of a rule we were going to 
implement. If an acronym generated under 5 posts, we were going to 
fold it back into a character head, or a sub-category head, rather 
than give it so much prominence.

Let's see what the situation is with Lupin once you've gone through 
the sections.


> 
> I am adding the Remus Lupin code to all the posts in the ESE and 
Good categories for the time being.  
> 
> So, just for now, if any of you come across a post that you wish to 
> code as Good or ESE, could you also code it to Remus Lupin as well?
> 

The technical response to this is that there is no need to code to 
the main head if a sub-category is coded. The system automatically 
knows that something is Lupin if a post has a tick from any of his 
sub-categories.

So, ok to do this if it makes your sort-out easier, but no need to 
retain the coding subsequently.


> 
> Does ESE!Lupin also need to be coded to ESE! if no one but Lupin is 
> being discussed as ESE?
> 
> When all is said and done, will the Remus Lupin code be applied to 
> posts that only discuss his Good- or ESE- ness?  Or will they be 
> coded to Remus Lupin only if they discuss other aspects of his 
> character?
> 

I don't think Debbie has yet reviewed the ESE! section (1.2.4.4), but 
I suspect that it should be divested of posts about a specific 
character being ESE, and only contain posts that talk about ESE as a 
so-called subversive style of reading. In the same way, posts should 
only be in the Faith section (1.2.4.2) when they are talking about 
reading the series at face value, or believing the author.

This came up before when KathyW did ESE!McGonagall, and it worked 
well to create a sub-category within the character, but de-check them 
from the general ESE category.

On your last point, it is hard to tell until you have reviewed the 
section. There is a major body of posts that argue backwards and 
forwards about his inherent goodness/badness, but no doubt separate 
from that there may be other categories of post that need different 
sub-headings (eg lycanthropy, as I said before).

Not sure if this helps!
Carolyn