Snape report

[Debbie]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" 
<quigonginger at ...> wrote:
>
> Ok, with Debbie still having a block of 100 to complete on the 
Main 
> cat (which will change things, but I'm guessing not by a whole 
lot), 
> here are the numbers:
> 
> 2.4.1 Snape- 1343
> 2.4.1.1 Snape and Love- 80*
> 2.4.1.2 Snape transfigured- 8
> 2.4.1.2.3 Vampire!Snape- 120
> 2.4.1.3 ESE!Snape- 21
> 2.4.1.4 Good! Snape- 87
> 2.4.1.5 Who is Snape working for?- 140
> 2.4.1.6 Character Studies- 99
> 2.4.1.7 Young Snape and MMWP- 167
> 2.4.1.8 Snape and Harry- 86
> 2.4.1.9 Snape and Teaching Style- 149
> 2.4.1.10 Snape as a Literary Construct- 4

Debbie:
Done!  All Snape posts have been reviewed.  I lopped an extra 55 
posts from main Snape out of my last 100 (not up to my usual 
standards, though), most of which were pushed to the subcats. 
 
Ginger:
> * Note= I didn't look in any of the acronyms.  I am sure LOLLIPOPS 
is 
> substantial.

Debbie:
102, to be exact.  I haven't checked the other acronyms, though. :-)

Ginger:
> My evaluation and a few notes from my head:
> 
> The main Snape cat will probably get a good paring down once it is 
> reviewed by one person.  As I said before, things which may have 
been 
> repetition to me may not have been to someone else as they haven't 
> read the same posts I did.  The inverse also applies.  I am 
guessing 
> that it will be brought down substantially.

Debbie:
I also suspect a lot more posts could be moved to the subcats.  I 
think I was a lot more aggressive than everyone else in moving 
posts.  

That's not to say a good paring down of Greasy-Haired!Snape and 
PERSEUS EVANS posts isn't also required.

Ginger:
> I believe the above is also true for the sub-cats.  I ran into 
many 
> discussions of the "Hermy and the Teeth" incident (which I moved 
to 
> Snape and Teaching), and I'm sure others did too.

Debbie:
I did the same with Hermy and the Teeth, Neville and the Poisoned 
Toad Threat, etc.

Ginger:
> I am still not sure what a literary construct is.  I have a fuzzy 
> idea, but if anyone could solidify that for me, I'd be grateful.
> The same thing goes for character studies.  Some of the things I 
left 
> on the main cat probably could go there.  Again, could someone 
define 
> that precicely for me?

Debbie:
I used literary constructs only for posts that addressed Snape in 
terms of his function in the book that did NOT look at him in terms 
of his own character.  That doesn't make sense, but it's a bit like 
pornography:  I know it when I see it.

I put posts in character studies if they talked generally about 
Snape's character -- what makes him tick.  Again, that's probably 
not very helpful.  In my last 100 I left a couple alone that in 
retrospect I think should be moved.  Perhaps I'll go back and do it.

I'd like to take another crack at main Snape.  Or perhaps I should 
review the ones I haven't seen, and others can look at my set of 
posts?  Maybe simultaneously attack the subcats, starting with the 
acronyms (I don't think I moved a single post to an acronym; the 
coders were pretty good at picking up those posts)?

BTW, I discovered an excellent prediction at #44793, from the 
venerable Pip, who asked:
 
"Is Snape a half-blood? Not half-vampire, or half-dementor, or half 
any other 'interestin' creature' but plain old half-muggle."
 
Give that girl a cigar.

Debbie