harry potter is almost here!^_^1 day!

Woot!!!!!!! I'm sooooooo excited! : )

I haven't seen the photos that you guys are referring to, but wouldn't the hypothesis that they're mostly real but someone faked some parts just for the sake of it be consistent with the evidence? The only serious "spoiler" I've seen is the epilogue with "well" as the last word, and I'm pretty much positive that it's fake. Is that epilogue supposed to be part of the photo-book?

Bookaholic - it's hard to say. I've seen it and it's a WHOLE book and if fake parts were interposed with real stuff, it would be a miracle because they thing flows like a regular story - it just seems, once you get past the first Chapter, really contrived and revelations are just dropping everywhere and there's a lot of OOC stuff. But it is a complete story and I would think that if fake things were interspersed it would come across that way, and it doesn't. The whole things sounds very fan fiction like in the end, including the epilogue (although I haven't finished reading the book or the epilogue). If anything it's a hoax done by someone with lots of time (see my posts around 1185 and after about what I think are inconsistencies), or by Scholastic (which seems wrong because that would cost them extra money on top of everything else). Or it's the real thing and JKR has screwed us overy royally and is laughing all the way to the bank. I don't want to think that, though. But that's how bad the book seems to me right now and I'm sorry I read even part of it. I'm sick to my stomach and I just want Saturday to come so I can see if I'm right or not.

Um...okay, more questions (which have probably been answered a hundred times already...sorry). 1. Does the photo-book match the ZendURL page? 2. Does the photo-book match the NYT/Baltimore Sun reviews? 3. Does the epilogue involve a character named after two other prominent characters worrying that they'll end up in Slytherin when they don't want to?

I haven't read the ZendURL page because I was already fretting about what I did read and didn't want to get more confused and depressed. So I don't know that. The photo-book matches up with the reviews in the sense that they identify what the Deathly Hallows are and that corresponds to what I did read. The epilogue does involve several characters named after dead people and I think I may have seen something involving Slytherin, but I don't recall, because I only did a quick glance and mostly I was checking page numbers. MSNBC states that there is a 784 page book online now, but the only book I saw online had 759 pages total, with epilogue. Scholastic still states that nothing has been authenticated. I'm sure they don't want to identify what is the real one, if any, since that would be a dead giveaway and a spoiler right from the publisher. If you haven't already, read my posts around 1185 or so. I give some more of my doubts. ANYBODY ELSE WITH DOUBTS? ANYTHING CLOSE TO PROOF THAT IT'S NOT REAL?

@bookaholic -1. Zendurl has pics of the leaked book, but it has pics another leaked book as well, these both conflict with each other, one of them has to be fake. 2. Yes, the leaked photo-book does match the reviews, or it matches the NYT one, thats the only one i've read. 3. Yes it does.

A response, as someone who has read the photo book (with all 700+ pages): 1. The photo book does not at all match the spoilers on the ZendURL pages -- those are completely, totally inaccurate, although I believe the epilogue posted on Zendurl is correct. 2. The photo book matches the Sun/NYTimes review on both general themes and the specifics of each review. I will say that assuming those papers got real copies of the book as they claim, and didn't read the photo book, the photo book must be the true version. For example (no spoiler) both the reviews and the photo-book delve deeper into the parental relationships with Luna/her dad and Malfoy/his mom, and refer to specific objects, to the point where a fan-fictional version would be hard pressed to match the true story in all of those details. 3. Yes, the epilogue in the photo book does involve those details. However, I will say this having read the photo book, despite what some others have said I agree with the reviews that it is a well done and satisfying ending to the series, especially once you read it rather than focusing on who dies/lives. If it turns out to be true, I think fans will be happy with how it turns out.

What...okay, I'm confused now. I can't find any pictures on ZendURL--I was referring to the "spoilers" directly on the webpage, which are apparently completely fake. Where are the pictures? Also, I'm still absolutely convinced that the epilogue I was talking about is fake, because not only is it bad writing, it's low on information and ignores too many important characters for them to all have died. And what's with the character who apparently survived the end of the war, became Headmaster, and then died of unknown circumstances soon after becoming Headmaster? That doesn't fit in at all. I think if the photo-book is associated with that epilogue, it can't be all that credible.

I believe that the epilogue is accurate, and I felt the same way reading the epilogue before I had read the book. I will only say that it makes a good deal more sense in the context of the rest of the book, whether they turn out to be real or not. Additionally, the Sun's review's description of the ending fits completely with the epilogue, although it could fit with many different possible versions. Only reading the epilogue without the book would be like hearing "Dumbledore forces Harry to poison himself" without undersanding the context (from HBP).

I'll trust you on that. Really, I would love the series to end that way, I'm just having a hard time believing it...oh well, the day after tomorrow isn't too far away. I can wait. I can wait. I can wait. Argh.

I haven't read all 700+ pages, and I have already posted my thoughts on why it may not be real at around comment number 1185 or 1186. That there is no consensus from the people that have read the book as to whether it was good or not, and in fact, I've heard more people say it sounds fake, just means we may all have to wait for Saturday (which is almost upon us). I should have done that in the first place. Last time, I just got spoiled with Chapter Titles that I thought couldn't be real (except for the ones already released) and they were. This is why I'm torn - it could very well be the real thing, but I've noted where I found discrepancies that make it seem not real. From what I saw of the epilogue, it was terribly fan-fiction like. I pictured her doing more of a list of what happens to everyone, rather than a scene like that, a scene that I've noted in a number of fan fiction stories. The epilogue may be accurate as to the story its attached to, but that doesn't make it the real thing. The only thing that has me leaning toward REAL is the reviews. The papers claim they got actual hard copies of the books, so unless China sent some fake ones early, they must be it. I can't imagine a reputable paper like NYTimes allowing someone to print a review if he didn't say, yes, I have the book in hand and here it is. That's what has me worried. Or maybe it's just because the story doesn't go how we thought it would and so some of us are just disappointed? Why can't it be Saturday?!

People might find these quotes interesting: "Bloomsbu ry said it was "dismayed" to learn about the early sales. But internet spoilers had not come from the few copies sold ahead of the official publication, it insisted." - BBC News "The publishers say the reviews have been based on false copies of the book." Sky News Given that the reviews closely match what I have seen of the leaked photo book this could be taken to mean that the leak is fake. Also, the time and date tags on the images say that the pics were taken on Sunday 15th and the first copies that were accidentally sent out didn't start arriving until Tuesday 17th. The leaked version is ALMOST DEFINITELY not one of the copies sent out by accident, so it must either have been stolen from a seller, a publisher, a library or a courier. Or, as I hope, it is not real. Whatever the case maybe, the person or people who did this are going to go down in history one way or another.

I agree with you ladyk -- the reviews match the photo book to the point where it would be extremely improbable for a fanfictional version to match on every detail/theme. If the photo version isn't real, the only explanations I can think of is 1. The Times/Sun in fact reviewed the photo version and never got a copy (unlikely, as you point out) or 2. The photo version intersperses real elements with fanfictional elements, or the faker read the real book and somehow made a fanfictional version with the same themes. Whether fans agree on the quality of the book is totally up to them, for my part I thought it was well done if it turns out to be real.

gj197 are those qoutes real and accuate cause thatd be awesome?

if you count every page before 1 and every page after 759 you get 784... its just math people.

It is reported that the photo book was one of the library copies that was smuggled out of the library... The libraries did have copies before the 17th. So far as the publisher's statements about the spoilers, its interesting that they seem to always criticize the "spoilers" rather than the actual photographed images, which they never explicitly reject. Now as I understand it, the text spoilers often contradict those photographs, so perhaps the publishers are truthfully rejecting the text spoilers while wording their statements carefully to avoid rejecting those photos. The problem with those photos - or with the idea that they're fake - is that, well from the photos I have seen around various websites, they're just too darn good. There are too many things that go into it for me to outright reject it. One of the big ones is the typesetting. That is a professional typesetting job there. That's not something you can fake easily or quickly, especially for over 700 pages of text.

Having read the photo book, I'll say this, IF it is the real version, many of the spoilers on the internet (especially ZendURL) are not true...to anyone who doesn't plan on downloading the photo book, I implore you to wait until Friday and not heed any internet spoilers.

Gryffinclaw - I copied and pasted them directly from the BBC News and Sky News websites. If you want to have a look go to: http://news.bbc.co .uk/1/hi/entertainment/69 05873.stm http://news. sky.com/skynews/article/0 ,,30200-1276110,00.html Hope that helps! ;) Plim - If you look on wikipedia under the Harry Potter pages it actually shows a compendium of quotes and interviews/questions in which Jo revealed what loose ends would be tied up. It has been available for some time i.e. since HBP, so it would be plausible that a fan could write something like that, if not a bit insane!. Also, if you look at my previous post it would seem that the publishers have confirmed that the reviews are from false copies.

I have read the 'hoax' book. It is really good. It just might be the real thing !!! :)

@Plim As a last resort to trying to prove this "leak" is fake, I was just wondering if you can confirm all the of the following information is in this "leak". If you can, then I will give up, and admit this is the real deal. The info comes from Mugglenets DH section, and i've taken out some info that i have already read about, and is confirmed to be in the "leak". Here it is: * We will find out something "incredibly important" about Lily Potter. * We will discover more about Dumbledore's past. * We will learn with whom Snape's loyalties lie. * Something will be revealed about Petunia Dursley, although we already know that she is not a Squib. * Viktor Krum will return (World Book Day, 2004 interview). * We will see a reappearance of Dolores Umbridge: "It's too much fun to torture her not to have another little bit more before I finish." (MuggleNet/Leaky Interview) * JKR has said "There is a character who does manage, in desperate circumstances, to do magic quite late in life, but that is very rare..." * We will learn the exact reason why some people become ghosts when they die and others do not. * The final chapter, which has already been written, will detail what happens to the surviving characters. * There will be no more Quidditch matches

@gj187 thanks for the link @Plim you actually read that nice, um so the spoliers floating are different then what yu read, I ask was it a dissapointment or was it better then we hoped

I haven't read the whole book as of yet, but as I can tell most of those are true in the photo book, especially some of the more detailed ones -- hopefully this won't spoil it for anyone, because people had speculated about those things happening based on the interviews.

Well, I just read the article from Sky News, and it's... I suppose interesting is the right word - it's interesting that there is no direct quote from the publisher. You'd think that there would be for such a critical statement. The problem with saying that they were based on false copies is this. They corroborate the photographed book. Those photos were taken on July 15th and posted on July 16th. This means one of a few things: 1) Someone produced multiple copies of the faked book and managed to get them purchased by a NYT employee in NY and somehow got one to the Baltimore Sun as well 2) someone (or multiple people) who found those photos online produced their *own* realistic looking edition - with all the realisitic qualities of professional printing and typesetting and all of that in between July 16th and 17th - in one days time. They would have had to type the entire thing out, too, because the photos are not nearly good enough to be able to run through text recognition software. Both of these scenarios seems exceedingly unlikely. 3) Scholastic purposefully produced fake editions to throw people off. The problem with this suggestion is that they are also sueing Deepdiscount.com, whhhhiiich is where the supposed leak to the Baltimore Sun came from, so.... there's just *sOOO* many problems with the suggestion that either the reviewed or photographed copies are frauds.

I have read the spoilors and one of the leaked books, I will not saw what did or did not hapen. but I have seen errors on many spoilors. exen ones that site the leacked copy.

Snape's memories are the saddest parts of all the book.......

Lazerlike - where did you read that the photo copy comes from a library book? Is there a news source you can give us a link for. Brothercool - how many pages was HBP supposed to be? Now go count the pages - the last page number with STORY TEXT ON IT should be the page number that Scholastic released. I believe it is (I don't have my HBP copy in front of me). I don't think the publisher would count author info, illustrator info, dedication and blank pages into the page count (unless someone can tell me otherwise). To those of you who think the picture copy is good (which I don't and I know I'm not alone), please tell me what was so great about it? None of the characters were OOC? You believed how the plot quickly changed from finding Horcruxes (which was the quest at the end of HBP) to something else? How about some of the background information on one of the major characters? Is that believable to you? gj197 - that's what I thought - that someone had rounded up all the loose ends and written their own story. I think that is very plausible. They've had about as much time to do the work as JKR and with all the mistakes that people notice, they didn't edit it either. It just reads like so much fan fiction because it drags on, doesn't get to the point like JKR does, there is no real humor that is reminiscent of JKR's sense of humor. No emotion in it at all. It just gets you from A to B and there is no depth. The more I think about it, however it was done, it's a fake. And maybe the Sun and the NYTimes did get it online. Of course, they are not going to reveal the sources, which makes it more suspect. Just MHO.

Well, at the beginning of the Sun review, it says "Editor's Note: The Sun obtained the book from a reader who is a relative of a Sun reporter. The relative pre-ordered the book from an online retailer and received it before the publication date. The Sun did not pay for the book." And I don't see why two mainstream newspapers would trust an online copy...and both reviews are highly favorable and make the book sound *very* deep, so either you're reading a different book from them (which you could be, somehow) or you just have a different opinion.

ladykrystyna - see http://www.zendurl.com/h/ hp7truth/ for the info about the library book. There are not any spoilers there. That is not the spoiler page at zendurl, it is JUST (as of double checking just a moment ago at 5:31 PM EST) a timeline of how the leak occured with all those involved listed and such. ------------------------- -As for the page numbers, I have double checked my other Potter books, soft and hardcover. In them, the official page count always equals exactly the last numbered page of the story plus the number of extra pages (dedications, TOC, about the author, etc.). For example, in COS softcover there are 752 official pages with 741 story and 11 "extra." In OoTP hardcover there are 896 official pages with 870 story pages and 26 "extras." If the photographed copy were real, that would make for a total of 25 extra pages to get from 759 to 784 - which is right on par with OoTP's 26.

I found one of those so called leaked copies and with in 3 chapters Quiddich reappeared. That right there made me think it was fake. I haven't however seen any of the scanned pages, but what is available so far doesn't seem to be at all like the other books. I also was one who ordered from DeepDiscounts.com I sure haven't gotten my book yet, so I don't know what that's about.

Another note - according to news stories I've read (I've been checking Google's News page all day), Scholastic has officially filed legal paperwork against the website.... which shows that there HAVE indeed been authentic books shipped early. They couldn't be filing legal paperwork as part of a PR campaign to discredit the spoilers in any way. And, seeing as the Baltimore Sun claims that this book came from an early shipment from a website... it seems fairly solid to me that its the real deal.

I read that news article today. But I have to say this not EVERYONE who ordered from DeepDiscounts got their book early. I didn't. On book 6 when I preordered from Amazon.com, it showed up a day early. Now I'm hoping that maybe the book will show up tomorrow. But I'm definitely not one to run and post what I've read all over the internet and spoil it for everyone.

i just can't wait, i want to find out if things are true or not.....CAN'T WAIT!!!!

Okay, about the only thing we can possibly be sure of is that Voldemort probably gets destroyed permanently--otherwise JR Rowling would be writing more books. Usually in a series the good guys "win" from every ending to "they all lived happily ever after" all the way to the ending of Shakespeare's "Hamlet" where practically everyone is dead. So only JK Rowling and a few others know until the 21st. Wouldn't keep me from reading the book anyway, because the fun has been the journey through all the books. As to the spoilers, I've seen a few online from those that claim to have early copies of the book somehow and they don't add up. Mostly they contradict one another.One spoiler particulary was badly spelled and punchuated(okay, my misspelling,there), but the possible source might be one of those anti-Harry Potters who think everyone should be reading only their Bibles, and Bible-related books, judging from the email id. J.K Rowling has repeatedly said that she wrote the final chapter long ago. So that doesn't mean the last chapter is the death of Voldy or whoever. It may wrap up everything in a coda. At least I hope so.

the time claims their "real" book matches leaked "photo" book. http://www.ny times.com/2007/07/20/arts /20bpott.html

I just read that epilogue again...on second thought, I'm not sure anymore why I thought it had to be fake. It DOES seem like JKR's writing. I guess it's all about preconceptions...so ladykrystyna, don't worry if you don't like what you read at first. It's actually kind of amazing how bad any piece of writing seems when you read it specifically looking for mistakes. I suddenly don't understand why I decided that the epilogue was bad, besides the fact that I was absolutely sure it was a fake. Wow. Are all human minds this easily affected by bias, or am I just silly?

bookaholic, --- I commented on this earlier, actually. My biggest concern for things that will ruin this for people (which means much more to me than if I personally were spoiled - I hate to see people disappointed) has nothing to do with the spoilers that are being leaked in and of themselves. After all, there is a spoiler out there that suggests that Ron dies - and one that says he doesn't. There's one that says Hagrid bites it.... annnnd others that say he doesn't. So these spoilers can't amount to anything. After reading them, the fan is left with no better an idea about how it turns out than he or she had before.------------------ ------------------------- -----The real danger lies not in what spoilers we see, but in what we do with them - what we do to ourselves, not what the spoilers do. If someone just accepts that people will claim stuff happens, he or she won't really be spoiled at all. There will be the mystery of which of the multifarious claims are true, if any. The real spoiler is when we set ourselves against something so strongly that we have to find problems with it. I've spent a *lot* of time looking at folks' reactions the past few days, and I've seen one major problem: people who are *so* angryabout spoilers that they have to have the satisfaction of having them all turn up to be false. Thus, they go ahead and read the leaked pages with their minds set against them to begin with, and they hate them. Then, if tonight it turns out they're real, these folks will already hate the thing from their own prejudice - their own spoiler, as it were. If someone, on the other hand, chooses to either ignore the leak altogether and just see what happens, or if they choose to read it accepting that it may be real and being willing to have read it early, then they can enjoy it for what it is.---------------------- ------------------I'm very worried that a lot of people are going to be very spoiled simply by being angry that (if) this ends up being real.

I just finished the photo book. I am just so horrified at how terrible it was. It's not that I'm angry about who lived and who died, or who ended up with who, or who won or lost, it's just...terrible! Many of the mysteries we were expecting to get resolved didn't (why does it matter that Harry has Lily's eyes, weren't we supposed to see the mirror of erised again, or the weasley's car?), the whole deathly hallows side-plot seemed incredibly contrived, and completely un-necessary. H/R/Hr just spend 2/3 of the book running around wasting time. I'm so disappointed.

LGMB, don't post up stuff like that that may ruin it for some folks.... I am quite certain that once everyone has had a chance to read it, these things will be explained to you.

bookaholic - I totally agreee. I hated what I first read (I haven't read the whole thing yet and as yet I still don't know who lives or dies in full) and was so disappointed. Then I took the time to re-read things and you are right, when you are looking for reasons to attack something they jump out of the page at you in full glory. I think that we have spent so much time talking and theorising about what is going to happen and that there has been so much hype about security and spoilers etc. that our first opinions are going to be very mixed because we already have a clear idea in our head of how we want it to be. When you step back from that a little you get a different perspective. PS. LGMB - sorry but I've got to agree with Lazerlike42. There are people on here who will be devastated to read comments like. I think what we're all trying to get to the bottom of is whether or not the leaked book is real, not all the reasons why the leaked version is good/bad, because again that is spoiler territory. No offence meant, just my thoughts.

The book I read online is FAKE. I downloaded it against my better judgement and photoshopped it to make it legible, which took a LONG time people, so you know how dedicated I must be. The thing is, there are at least two things in the online bookt hat directly conflict with canon. These are really not spoilers but just for posterity stop reading now if you have not already read the online photo version. OK - remember when it says in chapter 5 I think "A Place to Hide" that Harry may still have the "trace" on him fromt he ministry. Apparently the ministry has a "trace" on you until you turn 17. But in book six when Harry sees the memory of Morfin Gaunt and how Tom Riddle killed his father and grandparents and blamed Morfina nd got away with it, Harry specifically asks Dumbledore about why the ministry didn't know it was Tom Riddle because he was UNDERAGE AT THE TIME. If there was a "trace" Tom Riddle would have been caught. Dumbledore explains that this is why he, Harry, was blamed for the magic Dobby the house elf did at Privet Drive. The ministry can't even tell if it's wand magic or house elf magic, so what is this "trace" crap? If this is the real book Jo has some explaining to do! Plus if you have read it you know the scene from the US cover - never happens! Can't find anything like it! Please let me know what you think -email gin.blossom@yahoo.com

Actually, the whole underaged magic issue was inconsistent back in book 6 anyways. Back in book 2, we are told that the ministry can't tell that an underaged wizard is performing magic, only that magic occurs in his vicinity. That's why he was blamed for Dobby's magic. The same idea seems to be present in book 6, because the ministry didn't know Riddle used magic - in other words, they couldn't distinguish his magic from his mother's or anyone elses he may have been around at the time. So this creates a huge problem in that there is absolutely no way, based on this information, for the ministry to actually keep track of underaged magic. They could never, for example, get Ron for it, because all they'd ever know was that there was magic happening near him, which could have been from any of his family. Same goes for any wizard who isnt living with Muggles. So there is an inconsistency here already. Let's face it, JKR is only human and Harry Potter is only fiction - if we went through the first 6 books with a hermeneutic of suspicion we'd probably find all *sorts* of conflicts.

Just another interesting snippet...some people have said that as the date on the leaked photobook images is 2 days before the books that were sent out started to arrive, it is a library book. The library editions have a unique ISBN and the leaked photobook has the standard ISBN NOT the library edition ISBN. So the leaked photobook most probably isn't one of the early releases and it isn't a library book. I'm assuming that the books left the publishers some time ago now and have been with suppliers and distributors for a while, so it is unlikely that it was pinched from Scholastic because it would have been circulated long before now. The publishers sent out the books in sealed boxes with all sorts of security, so someone, somewhere would have noticed if one of the boxes had been tampered with after it left the publishers. I might be blinkered and illogical and in denial, but I am still of the belief that this really could be a FAKE.

gj197 - that's very interesting about the ISBN number. Thank you for confirming that. And it's consistent with the fact that there is NO SYNOPSIS on the inside front flap cover and there always was. Why isn't it there? Because Scholastic didn't release one yet, only Bloomsbury for the Children's Edition. To all of you who think that we readers entered it with prejudice - I read it almost the first day the news got out about it. I thought it was real . . . until about 1/3 of the way when I started to have my doubts. Now I find several people (not hundreds mind, you but quite a few) agreeing that something is wrong. Lazerlike - that's the point of the "trace" - JKR said in an interview (and know I don't remember which one; I'm a goober, not an uber goober) that the Ministry knows that it can't trace the magic in an all magic household and that they assume that Wizarding parents will control their underage children. JKR's own explanation makes it all consistent within the first 6 books. The "tracer" in the picture book makes no sense. There is no trace on individuals - it's just that they can detect magic being done, but not by whom.

On the subject of underage magic, I think that in one of the books Harry actually asks one of the Weasleys how the Ministry of Magic ever keeps track of underage magic in wizarding families because they'd never know who'd performed the magic. The Weasley in question (maybe Arthur - not sure but I'm sure it was at the Burrow) says that the Ministry depends on wizarding parents to bring up their kids to abide the 'no-underage-magic-rule'. There's NEVER been any mention of a Trace before now. So you're right, if this is Jo's book she has got some explaining to do!

ladykrystyna - sorry to duplicate what you just wrote - you got there before me, but at least I know I didn't imagine it! I know I have got too much time on my hands, but another inconsistency is that when has JK ever called the thing that Dumbledore uses to put out the street lights on Privet Drive in Philosopher's Stone a 'Deluminator'? It is a Put-Outer and I can't find the word anywhere Deluminator on the internet. Not on HP Lexicon or anywhere. If JK had ever uttered that word it would be on the internet somewhere, because everything else she has ever said about HP is!

This should serve as final confirmation for anyone who's still wondering, and I'm saying this completely honestly just to put out the information -- My mom pre-ordered a copy of the book through her office (in the US) and it arrived today, and it is without question the same book as the leaked photo book, as stated in the New York Times article today. I think the book is well done, and I wouldn't make this up to misinform anyone.

Quite frankly, I didn't want to know until I went to get the book tonight and I can't quite believe that you couldn't keep that bit of information to your self.

gj197 - actually Deluminator sounds kind of familiar to me. And you did the same type of investigating that I did - hp-lexicon! But you didn't find it on there? Hmmm. In any event, we can talk about it and talk about it, but the fact is we won't know for sure until tonight when we get our books. And I won't have long to wait, my mom picked up my wristband for me this morning (I'm in the Orange group which is the first group. I'm going with a friend of mine and I haven't confessed that I may have spoiled it for myself. I don't know if I'll be able to open the book in front of her - I might vomit if it's the same one! Thanks Plim for the update - hopefully you are wrong since it's so convenient that your mom got one today, THE DAY BEFORE. Did she get it through DeepDiscount? No matter, it's going to be what it is and there's nothing for it.

gj197 - I cross-checked you - you are correct, the hp-lexicon, which has just about everything on HP, calls it a Put-Outer and there is no Deluminator. Maybe why it's familiar is because it's a familar thing to call it or because I've read it somewhere, maybe written by someone who is not a HP fan and just describes it that way. JKR has mentioned it twice - in SS and OoTP and it's described as "Put-Outer". Why would she change that now!?