Side N
Anchored, Not Canon
Which sources back which section of this article, and what its evidence base looks like.
Which sources back which section
| Section | Sources behind it |
|---|---|
| What Happened | The official Hogwarts Legacy FAQ (Warner Bros. Games, undated); the Wizarding World developer Q&A (25 Jan 2023); the encyclopaedic article on the game; Screen Rant (19 Jan 2022); GGRecon (13 Feb 2023); Den of Geek (17 Feb 2023); Game Rant (23 Feb 2023); WorthPlaying (17 Dec 2025) |
| Timeline | All eleven. Every dated entry comes from one of them: the FAQ and the developer Q&A for what the licensor published, the three encyclopaedic articles for the release, label and series dates, the four canon pieces for their own publication dates, Variety for November 2024, and WorthPlaying for December 2025 |
| The Argument | The official FAQ, for every quotation; the encyclopaedic article on the game, for the character creator, the houses and the ending; and all four canon pieces, each quoted for its own verdict and its own reasoning |
| What Others Add | The encyclopaedic articles on Portkey Games and on the HBO television series; the encyclopaedic article on the game for the budget, the sales history and the cancelled expansion; Variety (5 Nov 2024) for the Haddad quotation; WorthPlaying for the 40 million announcement and the publisher’s own copy; the developer Q&A for the design intent |
| Conclusion | The official FAQ; the encyclopaedic articles on the game and on the HBO series; and Variety for the one sentence about the sequel |
What the evidence base looks like
- 11Sources behind this article
- 11Read in full, at their own page — none at an abstract, an extract or second-hand
- 2Published by the party the article is about, and marked as such wherever they are used
- 1Item inside the record that is second-hand: a March 2025 cancellation whose original report is blocked from here
| What the source is | How many | How they were read |
|---|---|---|
| Documents published by the party the article is about — the game’s own FAQ and the franchise’s own developer interview | 2 | Both read in full at their own address. They are the subject, not a witness to it, and the page says so wherever it quotes them |
| Tertiary reference articles, continuously edited and footnoted | 3 | All read in full. Every fact taken from them was taken from a passage carrying its own citation |
| Enthusiast-press explainers answering the canon question | 4 | All read in full and compared against one another, which is how their textual overlap was established. They are carried as opinions and named on the page |
| Trade and games press relaying a named executive or a publisher announcement | 2 | Both read in full. One carries a quotation attributed to a named company president; the other reproduces a publisher announcement |
Reliable
Reliable, but with an interestWorth believing and reliableWeak on both, and used with careHonest, but thin
Worth believing