|Reviews for Honestly Harry - The Unplottable Discoveries|
| Guest chapter 37 . 1/10
Was Ginny's confession of not wanting to be so sexual supposed to be believable? She's been over the top aggressive with Harry since she before her 10th birthday. And now all of the sudden we're supposed to believe that wasn't what she wanted. I don't buy it at all. She is a scarlet woman or more to the point, a scarlet little girl.
| Guest chapter 25 . 1/9
So, the family with the kids asks a stranger to babysit their kids. What kind of parents do that? She could be a pedophile for all they know. They should have cancelled their dinner and had room service instead of endangering their children's lives.
| Guest chapter 24 . 1/9
The advice that Tony gave Harry was terrible advice for a married couple. Yes, one partner can make independent decisions, but not when those acts affect the partnership. Ginny showed how much disrespect she has for Harry and their marriage by acting independently. All decisions that affect the other person should be discussed. It is a partnership after all.
There's not a shower much less a bathroom on a cruise ship that two people can fit in at the same time much less three.
| Guest chapter 23 . 1/9
Typical Ginny. It's about her. She doesn't care about the consequences of her actions. She doesn't care about anyone except herself, but what do you expect from an 11 year old. She's still a spoiled rotten child
| Guest chapter 18 . 1/9
So, they aren't going to have intercourse until Ginny is 15, which is in three years? Hermione will be almost 17 by then. Are we really supposed to believe that these kids are going to wait three years considering they are already doing everything except intercourse? It seems to me that on the pace you have them, it will be likely three weeks not three years.
| Guest chapter 11 . 1/8
I'm so tired of Ginny's brothers threatening him all the time. It's so repetitive and unneeded.
| Guest chapter 7 . 1/8
You said that Ginny's would have a marriage to plan for. You meant a wedding, right? A marriage and a wedding are two different things.
| Guest chapter 4 . 1/7
So, we're supposed to believe that sexually aggressive Ginny is now all of the sudden concerned? She's been trying to get into Harry's pants since she was nine years old!
| bkerrmom1 chapter 14 . 12/23/2015
I love that you gave Myrtle a ghost boyfriend. I have not seen that concept before. Excellent story.
| Harrypotterpercyjacksonfan90 chapter 37 . 10/7/2015
Awesome chapter I finally got around to reading this chapter after starting awhile ago and loved it about to start the next one and looks forward to it!
| ThunderClaw03 chapter 32 . 6/9/2015
It would be great if Harry and his girl's became animagi
| ThunderClaw03 chapter 16 . 6/8/2015
A whole hell of a lot surprises
| ThunderClaw03 chapter 2 . 6/7/2015
Are Harry and the girls going to become animagus update soon
| Guest chapter 31 . 5/20/2015
Monster Mash, reference?
| Guest chapter 31 . 5/19/2015
Greatly enjoying reviewing the series from the beginning. Your writing is quite imaginative, so I hope you won't take this as a "flame." I certainly don't mean it that way.
I'm really trying not to sweat the relatively small typos and such, which is why I hadn't previously pointed out (among other things) even repeating appearances of "brother-in-laws" instead of "brothers-in-law." (One should pluralize the noun usage rather than the adjective in this kind of complex subject. For another application of that standard, a gathering of more than one "Attorney General" results in a group of several "Attorneys General").
Here, I'm reluctantly moved to comment because you seem to be pushing one of my more interesting hot buttons while also missing the now-common (ab)use of the form. :)
"... If you’re EXPECTING THAT back at Hogwarts you have another THING coming."
The syntax I believe that you're trying to adopt goes, "if you THINK (whatever), then you have another THINK coming." Sadly, the correct usage of that particular syntax is almost never seen any more. :(
In the general sense "ANOTHER thing" is meaningless without an INITIAL "thing" to be "another" of. Many authors/speakers in recent years use the initial "think" while using "thing" at the end, which results in similarly mismatching "another" referents. In somewhat humorous irony you've got a "thing" as parallel to an expectation, which violates both the implied parallelism and the now-common form of (ab)use. :)