Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Middle-earth: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 08:37, 27 June 2006 editCarcharoth (talk | contribs)Administrators73,578 edits →Templates to categories← Previous edit Latest revision as of 08:30, 10 October 2024 edit undoChiswick Chap (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers296,627 edits →Maria Skibniewska: r 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Project header|sc1=WT:Me}}
{| class="infobox" width="300"
{{WikiProject banner shell|
|-
{{WikiProject Middle-earth}}
!align="center" colspan="1"|]<br/>]
}}
----
{{Archives|list=<div style="text-align:center;">{{Archive list|prefix=archive|prefixspace=no|auto=long}}</div>|search=yes|age=200
|-
|Past discussions and issues can be located by clicking on the archive links.}}
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config
*] (Nov. 25, 2005 &ndash; Apr. 02, 2006)
| algo=old(200d)
*] (Apr. 05, 2006 &ndash; May 15, 2006)
| archive=Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Middle-earth/archive%(counter)d
----
| counter=19
|-
| maxarchivesize=75K
|<small>
| archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator|prefix=archive}}
If anyone wants to pull out or copy a previous discussion, feel free to to do so. —''']]]]''' 01:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
| minthreadsleft=10
|}
| minthreadstoarchive=2
==Community==
}}
===Role call: Late May &ndash; June===
{{TOC limit|2}}
Sign your name below and comments are optional.


==Article alerts==
#I'm here, just on wikibreak. (See my userpage for further details). —''']]]]''' 01:41, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
The following list is updated daily by a bot. For manual entries, add a thread as usual at the bottom of this page.
#I'm here as well. Still rummaging around the category system when I get time, and really wanting to start adding more stuff to articles soon! ] 11:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
# Right here. Doing random stuff.--] 08:36, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
#I'm here too. Just doing some random things, and I am probably at a little lower activity level, since I am having my exams this week. ] 08:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
#Howdy. Busy at work, but doing some article cleanup and referencing. --] 10:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
#Same story as Bryan. --] 17:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
#Just nominated ] for F.A., finally. I guess I will attempt go get another up to F.A. assuming lotr passes, not sure which yet. ]] 23:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
#Here, somewhat. Haven't had as much time lately. -] 00:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
#Here. Editing whenever I feel like it, and merging or expanding where needed. <span class="internal" title="View my user page" style="white-space: nowrap;">-- <span class="internal" title="View my user page" style="white-space: nowrap;">-- ]&middot;]</span> 14:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
#Here. Doing random stuff.--] 12:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Middle-earth/Article alerts}}
==Issues==
<!-- ] 05:39, 13 August 2030 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1912829949}}
===Expanded 1956 radio adaptation article===


== ] ==
I've done a big expansion of ]. Comments on the talk page would be great. I'm unsure about where to draw the line with quotes from ''Letters'' (I've quoted nearly every Letter where Tolkien mentions this radio series), and I think the formatting and references need to be tidied up quite a bit. Possibly the external link reference can be removed, depending on whether everything in that source can be tracked back to ''Letters''.


New article you may enjoy - translated b/c of my suggestion. A Polish translator of Tolkien works. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]&#124;]</sub> 07:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
I was very gratified to discover that Misplaced Pages already has articles on ] and ]! Sadly, when I tried to link to ], I found something else (rather less savoury) squatting in that article! I'm going to try and update all the other articles I've linked, so hopefully the information in this article will be consistent with other articles.


:@] Close to a GA level, perhaps? I could help a bit with Polish sources or such if you'd like to work on that. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]&#124;]</sub> 07:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
I also discovered that the year is wrong in the title! I'm going to be moving the page to the correct name soon, just as soon as I get advice on whether ] or ] is better. ] 21:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
::I think it's splendid: good work! But it's more like yours, you should take it to GAN, not me – all you have to do is to work in some of the Polish sources as it's already of a decent standard. In any case, as you can see above, my GAN queue stretches back six months or more, and in fact I'm successively dropping Middle-earth GANs as I work biological topics up to GA. Who knows, I might even review the article! All the best, ] (]) 08:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

===Took out the Trash===

I have edited the article on ''The Mewlips'' to remove misinformation from Day's ''Tolkien Bestiary''. And the source is now ''The Adventures of Tom Bombadil''.
]
:Wonderful. Thanks. One thing, I'm not sure this is the best place to annouce that. I don't check this page very often, and only came across this after you left a message on my user page. ] 12:39, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
<small>(this section was moved into its appropriate section by —''']]]]''' 21:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC))</small>

=== More trash to take out ===

Can someone tidy these articles? They need to have references to the relevant books by Christopher Tolkien or J. R. R. Tolkien, rather than David Day's Bestiary.

*]
::'''Are like any other brambles. Deserve neitheer an article nor mention anywhere else.'''--] 14:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
:::Have a look at the merge tags I've put on the articles ] and ]. This is good thing to do if you spot something like this and don't have time to do the merge at the moment. ] 12:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
*] - where does Christopher Tolkien mention this?? ] 12:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
*:See the Silmarillion appendix entry for 'mal-'. --] 22:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
*] -
::Only mentioned by name. It has nothing more. No descriptin, attributes, nothing. So I have edited the ] article to make mention of this. Is a seperate article necessary?--] 14:32, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
:::Again, merge with ]. See tags I've added. ] 12:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
*]- '''Cleaned up. Out, David Day, Out!'''--] 14:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
:LOL! Calm down! His books aren't '''that''' bad... ] 12:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
] 12:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

But please, please remember to categorise the redirects, so we don't lose track of them! ] 12:38, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

=== Middle-earth gallery expanded ===

I've been rumaging around articles and Commons and uncovering lots of Tolkien-related images on Misplaced Pages, ranging from screenshots of the movies, to Tengwar writing, to book covers, to photos of Tolkien himself. I've added most of the ones I could find to ]. I've also noted there which areas I haven't browsed yet to find more images to enter into the gallery. These are the large areas that will take longer to browse. Does this updated gallery look useful? What are the standards for pictures here? What should we do with all these pictures, especially the numerous screenshots from the films? ] 13:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
:Cool. This is defiantly useful although I think it's suppose to be in wikipedia commons. I think we should make as much catogeries as relevently possible and group them (images can go into multiple catagories). We should even try getting one nominated for featured picture. --] 18:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
::I wasn't sure whether to expand the Commons selection of pictures, or go with this one. I'm still not quite clear on what the difference is anyway. I think images on both Misplaced Pages and Commons are linked to in the same way, but the actual location may be different. Also, Commons has a different licence to the GFDL one on Misplaced Pages - not sure how different though. As for featured picture, I would suggest one of the pictures of Tolkien (if they are public domain) or one of the scans of the front cover of the first edition of 'The Hobbit' - could be accompanied by something about how valuable those first editions are. ] 18:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

::Actually, 'Commons' is a place for '''public domain''' images which can then be used on all the MediaWiki sub-projects. Thus, alot of these pictures (all the movie stills, photos of Tolkien, book & DVD covers, et cetera) can't be uploaded to Commons because they are 'fair use' rather than 'public domain'. Whenever you create an 'image:' link the system checks if that image name exists on the current project and, if not, whether it exists on Commons. Thus, any image which ''is'' freely available for use by all should go on Commons by default so that it can be used by all the wikiprojects. The gallery is useful for seeing what images are available to add into articles and for other uses. Ideally, we would want to have as many freely available / 'public domain' images as possible... because there are then no potential copyright issues, they may be nominated as featured pictures, et cetera. Unfortunately, it isn't always easy to come up with such. --] 21:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Thanks. That makes things a bit clearer. I'll continue expanding the gallery here then (including both Misplaced Pages and Commons images), and not worry about organising the content on Commons (that can come later). What though, is the best way to organise the Misplaced Pages images? By galleries (which can be labelled and annotated) or by categories (which can't) or both? I guess any organisational structure should also clearly indicate which images are from Commons, and thus more widely available.

:::As for featured pics, does a scan of a book cover count as public domain if it is very old book, say published in 1937? :-) ] 04:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

::::Copyright duration is a ridiculously complex issue, but generally extends 50 to 70 years from ''death'' of the original creator. Thus, any text/image created by JRR Tolkien will probably be under copyright another twenty to forty years. If Christopher can claim partial contributor status based on his work on the maps and proofreading or some other grounds then it might well extend 70 years after ''his'' death (as ''The Silmarillion'' and similar texts definitely will). In the case of ''The Hobbit'' cover art it would depend on who created the image or possibly fall under the 'corporate content' rules (if they hired someone to create the image, but they owned the rights to it) which I believe is 95 years from creation... which would still be another 20+ years. So, overall... none of the stuff we might want to use is likely to fall outside its copyright duration any time soon. --] 12:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

OK. The gallery is finished! Well, unless people upload any more pictures. But at least ] is a snapshot of what images were present in Tolkien and Middle-earth related articles in May 2006. There is some duplication (I managed to create two sections for the film cast, which should be merged back into one section), and more organisation is needed. I'm going to leave it for a bit, as I've had enough of pictures for now! I'm also not quite sure how to organise it, and what the gallery is best used for... I had some vague ideas of using the gallery to come up with standards for the use of images (especially film screenshots - the images should link back to the articles they are in). Maybe we should identify articles that need a better picture, or ones that don't have a picture at all? ] 22:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

=== Interesting discussion on Noldor spelling ===

Discovered an interesting (well, to some) discussion on the spelling of Noldor. See ]. ] 06:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

=== Alternative family tree template? ===

I think I've found another way to do family trees. It looks quite nice. Not sure if it is mentioned in the discussion on family tree templates that is somewhere round here, but I really, really like the format used at ]. ] 06:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
:Found the family tree format discussion ] and added a comment. Have we decided on what format to use, or is the discussion still going? ] 06:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

=== Copyright issues for poems and similar stuff ===

Found another very interesting article at ]. Someone has put up some of the early versions of the oath, which are fascinating. I am slightly worried though about copyright issues. What is the standard concerning quoting whole poems or large chunks of text? Where should the line be drawn? Does the amount of commentary and contextualising affect how much can be quoted? The same issues apply for ], ], ], and the Ring Verse at ] (here, for example, I would like to mention and maybe quote some of the early versions of the Ring Verse). A different approach is taken at ], ], and ], where only the opening lines or extracts are given (not surprising for Errantry, which is a long poem). Nothing at all is quoted at articles like ], ] or ]. ] 06:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
:As an example of "context", I've expanded and tidied up ]. As a history of the song, I find the article quite powerful. Do the very brief comments justify the full quotes though? ] 07:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
::More changes. The original article was quoting the wrong songs!! I've now corrected this and added some more stuff about other walking songs. I even found a literary reference to a real fairy-story! ] 10:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
:::Yikes! I put the first three versions up. Well, at least they're only excerpts of larger poems, as opposed to whole poems. I don't have a copy of '']'' so I'm not sure about the last version. Do they belong in Wikiquote? Anyway, a footnote in the ] article attributes the last version to '']'', which I have, and I assure you it's not in there. ] 08:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC) (not a member.)
::::] (is there something else called ]?) is for public domain quotes only, I believe. The Maedhros footnote should be corrected. Excerpts are OK, as long as there is commentary and analysis (which might fall foul of ]), but in general excerpts should be kept as small as possible. ] 09:48, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
:::::Oops. I got very confused between the two projects. I'm still confused, as I couldn't find out whether Wikisource is for anything (with permission) or only old public domain texts. Wikiquote doesn't seem suitable for long extracts from poems. It seems to be more for quotes of what people or fictional characters have said. ] 09:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
::::::Wikisource is basically anything 'public domain'... which includes old books (paralleling project Gutenberg), many government documents, items specifically released by their creators, et cetera. Thus Tolkien poems would not be allowed there. Use of quotations of poems and letters gets tricky because they can sometimes be considered to have 'individual copyright'... quoting a three line poem out of a thousand page book seems like a reasonable application of 'fair use' if the poem is relevant to what you are commenting on, but if the poem were published separately (and some of them were) then you'd be quoting a copyrighted work in full, which is definitely a violation of fair use. So, some Tolkien poems we can probably quote under fair use and others we cannot (''Bilbo's Last Song'' is one I know we definitely cannot). The ] article is a good example of quoting a poem for purposes of analysis, but that one is public domain. --] 11:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
:::::::Wow. Thanks for the link to ] - that was an interesting read. Getting back to Tolkien, what do you think of the articles I mentioned above? Would they be fair use, or are they quoting too much without any justification? Thanks for the point about ] - should we remove the article's external link to a copy of the poem? ] 11:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
::::::::Yeah, that's a great article. On the different pages; I think ] & ] would probably be ok if they actually analyzed the meaning and significance of the quoted verses rather than simply listing them. I'm not sure about ] - some versions have been separately published, but it has also been so extensively used that I'm not sure copyright could be exerted at this point. The other's all seem ok as they are. The external link on ''Bilbo's Last Song'' goes to a copyvio, but I don't think there is any requirement to not link to copyvio sites. --] 21:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Another point, I don't like the way some people wikilink from quotes, as at ]. IMO, the relevant bits should be mentioned and linked from the accompanying commentary, leaving the quote clean and easy to read. In fact, this is almost certainly a guideline somewhere. ] 11:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

=== New linguistics articles ===

Two new linguistics articles have been added recently:
*]
*]

Also, I discovered that ] is linked from ]. I suspect this is wrong, and was done automatically, but thought I had better check whether anyone knows whether David Salo is indeed a swimming coach, as well as a Tolkien linguist. :-) ] 02:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

And some more linguistics stuff. Redirects have been created for all the Tengwar characters! See ] and for a sample. I'm not sure whether to be impressed or not. ] 02:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

=== Another article referencing Day's Bestiary ===

Can someone please check the ] article for David Dayisms. Thanks. ] 10:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
:Now done. Thanks! ] 15:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Only one more, I think: ]. Probably some David Day speculation in there. I think this is the lot, mainly because I found this ]. ] 15:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
:I made 'alfirin' a redirect to ] and added more details there. --] 02:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks. Was the content at alfirin nearly all David Dayisms then? (''"The alfrin plant is very special to the elves, as it both symbolises the gold bells of Valinor, which the blessed constantly hear in the Undying Lands, and the call of the Eldar to voyage home, across the Belegaer, into the west."''). Shocking... ] 13:26, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
:::Yeah, Day does a good job digging out obscure references, but he then embellishes considerably. --] 22:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

==Difference Question==

How is this project going to be any different from the wiki ? --], ''Also known as '''Narfil Palùrfalas''' of Tolkien Gateway''
:'''If''' Misplaced Pages were significantly restricting the sort of Tolkien content which can be included then I'd contribute to one of the Tolkien specific Wikis more. However, since to date this hasn't been a problem it makes more sense to me to store the information in the most 'visible' source. Note that many of the articles, templates, et cetera on that 'Tolkien Gateway' Wiki were copied directly from here. If the inclusion of these materials in Misplaced Pages ever ''does'' become an issue we could thus just relocate them, but until then what is 'different' about the Tolkien content here is that it is on a top 20 website and thus gets read and edited by hundreds of people every week. --] 12:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

::I see. Thank you. By the way it is true that many of the articles were copied from Misplaced Pages. The reason for this is with only about five or six active editors we didn't want empty spaces until we could get around to writing/rewriting them. Still, I believe that now Tolkien Gateway has more entries and larger entries currently than Misplaced Pages. --] 15:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

:::Out of curiosity, I'd be interested in hearing the other side of this. How is the Tolkien Gateway wiki different than this project? (Or, more broadly, different than the Tolkien content on Misplaced Pages in general?) What is the advantage of the separate site? (And in particular, if the Tolkien Gateway has started out by populating its articles from corresponding Misplaced Pages entries, what was the argument against simply improving them on Misplaced Pages instead?)--] 16:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
::::What I see is less consistency, and that there are (somewhat) duplicate articles: , , , . Also note that for example Aldarion's main article is at Tar-Aldarion, while Cirion's main article is at Cirion. ] 18:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

:::::Concerning those "duplicate" articles, many (if not most) of the few editors believe that the individual names should each have articles. I am, incidentally, not one of them; I prefer a section of names at the bottom or top of one article to many individual articles. I'm not sure quite why it was seperated from Misplaced Pages (I am not , the founder of the site), but I do think it is a good idea to have a seperate wiki. As for copying them from Misplaced Pages articles, most were not. For most of the answers you should talk to Hyarion on his user talk or on the Main Page talk, for I joined months after the project was started. --] 22:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

::::::How is different from and any other Tolkien wikis? At least the Tolkien content on Misplaced Pages itself will definitely get more exposure. Though I don't know if that's the case with . ] 08:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

:::::::Well, here's , which seem enticing, but then... And how about How's that any different? ] 08:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC) (not a member.)

::::::::Hello Uthanc (and everyone), sorry for taking so long to respond. Great question regarding the difference between The Tolkien Wiki. The Tolkien community really isn't large enough for so many wikis and I certainly wouldn't want to spend time on something that was simply going to disappear when the wiki phase dies out so I understand your concern. Walter created his wiki some years ago before I found it, and while I've watched it over the past year I've yet to see really any editing, a bit of removing of spam and this past month has probably been the most as there were months in which not a single article was edited. Which is unfortunate but seems to be common among wikis as it really takes some dedicated editors to work for so long by themselves to build up a database. Walter's encyclopedia concentrates on legendarium aspects while Tolkien Gateway also expands into fields such as calendars (we currently host the largest archive of Tolkien Calendars), collectibles, books, information not considered canon such Bingo and Trotter, images, essays, reviews, news, etc. while also focusing on the legendarium of course. I believe TTW also has a different copyright policy in which their content is actually "protected" while we use the copyleft GFDL license that Misplaced Pages uses which allows free distribution as long as the content is kept free. I'll try and stop now as I'm obviously going to be biased in my statements about which wiki is "better." In the end however, Tolkien Gateway is only growing and you will be hearing more about us as time progresses. Thanks for your time and I'll try to keep advertisements like this to a minimum as I enjoy the Misplaced Pages project and the last thing I'd like is to take away from it. --] 01:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

My view on all this is that there are some articles that would never fit comfortably on Misplaced Pages, by which I mean the detailed fandom histories, and lists of books about Tolkien and Middle-earth, and articles about the fanzines and websites (I've seen such articles on some of the Tolkien wikis). Much of this would not be of interest outside fandom. I also think that there are different ways of writing the same article. One way is to write as if you are a Middle-earth historian, and that these people are real (this tends to duplicate the way Tolkien wrote about them). The other way is to write as if the person, place, etc is a character in a story, and to write about it in relation to the author and other aspects of the real world. This is a more analytical style. Sometimes neither style fits comfortably in Misplaced Pages. I would hope that the main topics and subject areas eventually become worthy Misplaced Pages articles, and that the other stuff (some of which I want to help write!) finds a home somewhere. I do worry sometimes about the overlap, but haven't really thought of a suitable way to encourage co-ordination and reduce duplication of effort. ] 11:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

:One question in particular I have for Hyarion is the issue of permissions for pictures by fan artists and other Tolkien artists. Plus other stuff like front covers of fanzines like Amon Hen, and calendars and things llike that. It all looks very nice, but I'm unclear where all the permissions have come from. Is there somewhere on the Tolkien Gateway that makes all this clear? Thanks. ] 12:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

::PS. Thanks for the link to ]'s blog from the Tolkien Gateway front page. I wasn't aware of that, and there is some very interesting stuff there. ] 12:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

:::Glad you like the blog :) The cool thing about that was Brian Sibley actually emailed me to tell me about it, quite flattering and we are hoping to work with him on future projects (hopefully to get him in for a chat on our IRC network). You've asked another important question regarding images; we are very interested in working with artists to make sure they allow their work to be displayed. The most well known Tolkien artists such as Lee, Nasmith, Howe are quite lenient to fans and I spoke with Howe a short time ago. As long as they are acknowledged for the piece and are not out to make a profit then they are more than willing. We also try and forward as many visitors as possible to their websites as the more people buying the art, the higher possibility of the artists producing more :) I spoke with earlier this week and we received permission to host of his Fraud of the Rings comics. This is something no one, not even his official site, does and we are thrilled to be able to help showcase projects like this that would not have been possible. We also recently spoke with the who brought up the fact that the JRRT monogram on our logo is owned by the Tolkien Estate, so we will either be contacting TE for permission (which they have granted in some cases) or creating a new logo as pleasing and working with them is one of our main goals, something most sites try to hide from if anything. I'm working on a page which will list specifically what we have been given permission to use, otherwise we will assume most of the artwork is considered fair use until we can research differently. Thanks for your input as it is much appreciated. --] 16:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

::::Thanks, Hyarion. You sure did a far better job than I did at explaining it. --] 20:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for those comments Hyarion. I think I might pop over and start contributing to the Tolkien Gateway, though I want to set myself a clear demarcation on what subjects to contribute to either site. Please don't take this the wrong way, but I am considering editing "serious" articles on Misplaced Pages (anything that I think the reader of a general encyclopedia would find of interest), and "fandom" articles on Tolkien Gateway (anything that only fans would be interested in). One of the things that might help is having an article covering all the Tolkien wikis - I think the Tolkien Gateway would be a good place to have that. Or maybe, even better, something covering the main Tolkien websites out there. I've considered something like that for Misplaced Pages, but I'm not sure about it. ] 08:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

:PS. I've also bookmarked the Tolkien News site - that is really good! ] 08:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

::''The most well known Tolkien artists such as Lee, Nasmith, Howe are quite lenient to fans and I spoke with Howe a short time ago. As long as they are acknowledged for the piece and are not out to make a profit then they are more than willing.'' Does this mean it's all right with at least these three if one puts their artwork here without explicit permission, as long they're properly credited? All the Jackson images bug me. (Using ] and ]'s artwork, as of now, requires their permission.) ] 01:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

:::Hello, , (See the 12 November 2002 entry) I'll have to research a bit more to find the quote from Lee. I agree, seeing every article with images from PJ's films can be rather one-sided and other Tolkien artists tend to bring a breath of fresh air. In the end as long as you stick with low-res images, credited, and link to the official site it should fall under Fair Use. --] 05:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

== Handy links to Prefix Index ==

Here are some handy links to all articles beginning with certain words or phrases:

*
*
*

And the same for categories:

*
*
*

And for templates:

*
*
*

And for portals:

*
*
*

] 11:36, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

== ] is now a featured article! ==

Well, the title says it all! I still think a little bit more work needs doing on it, but a huge amount of work has already gone into bringing ] up to featured article status. I'd like to congratulate ] (who nominated it and did a lot of the recent work on it), and everyone else who worked on it. ] 21:04, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

== Time for a new collaboration ==

] is now featured (along with ] and ]&mdash;am I missing any?). Time for a new collaboration, I think. Any suggestions? ]<sup>] ]</sup> 03:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
:I think those three are the total number of featured articles. I don't think there are any specific articles that are as important to bring to featured status. How about a series of improvement drives on the articles about the books? This would aim to bring all such articles up to a minimum standard. The best place to start is ] and its subcategories. From there, we can get the following list (I've excluded non-fiction and the more obscure medieval poetry):

Middle-earth:
*] (])
*] (])
*] (])
*] (])
*] (])

Minor works:
*] (])
*] (])
*] (])
*] (])
*] (])

Other:
*] (])
*] (])
*] (])
*] (])
*] (])

Some of these articles are OK. But some need to be worked on. Could people have a look through them and add comments on the talk pages on how much work, and what sort of work, is needed? And then back here mark the ones that need work done on them. ] 22:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

:The things you list could all use improvement, but I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the featured article possibilities for the project. All of the books, for example, could be Featured Article Candidates if brought up to a high level of quality. Several of the daughter articles of ] could also qualify. If ] can be a featured article, then anything is possible. ]<sup>] ]</sup> 00:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

::Some of the major characters, particularly Gandalf, could also be brought up to featured article status. --] 00:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Replying to Savidan, I agree, getting the articles to Featured status is possible and should be the aim. But do we concnetrate on one article, or improve a series of articles? The three currently featured articles seem to fall in the following three categories:

*Places (Middle-earth)
*Tolkien (J. R. R. Tolkien)
*Books (The Lord of the Rings)

Maybe the best approach is to get an article up to featured status in the other categories we can think of, and then to use the featured article of each category as an example from which to improve the other articles in that category. Some categories I can think of, with suggestions for articles to try and improve/get featured:

*Characters (])
*Tolkien people (])
*After Tolkien (an overview article on adaptations, using material from articles at ], with similar overview articles on ] and ])
*History of Middle-earth (], plus the articles in the template at that page)
*Races (])
*Languages (])
*Geography (no article yet, but could be created as a daughter article of ], based on ])

Further improvement, based on existing articles:

*Books (] and ] - based on ])
*Places (] or something else that a lot can be written about)

From this, we can probably come up with a list of 10 articles that should be improved, hopefully to featured status, which would serve as an excellent introduction to Middle-earth. What do people think? Set up this list and then pick one to work on? ] 14:13, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

== ] article needs improving! ==

Following on from the suggestion above, and looking through the articles on that list, I think it is fair to say that the article on ] needs most work doing on it. Unfortunately, it is also the most difficult one to write! Shall we have a go? ] 23:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

:Sounds like a good project to me. --] 00:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

== Which are the major character articles? ==

Continuing the discussion of what articles to work on next, which are the major/interesting character articles? There is ], but for LotR, I would, off the top of my head, pick: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ].

Though the inclusion of some of these as major might be debatable, particularly Arwen and Celeborn! Also, we see more of some monsters than some of these characters, particularly: ], ].

Conrad has suggested ] would be a good candidate article to work on, but does anyone like (or dislike) the look of any of these articles? Would they qualify as a first "tier" of articles to work on? ] 13:31, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

:A general point from looking at those articles: the use of film images is inconsistent. There is a template to put an image in an infobox at the top of an article. See for example ], but this gives too much emphasis to the Jackson films. A better approach, IMO, is the way it has been done at ], or ]. What do people think? ] 13:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

== Templates to categories ==

It is rather presumptuous for this project to have the templates {{tl|Dragons}} and {{tl|Dwarves}} since you can find them outside Tolkein's writings. They also seem to be better suited for use as categories anyway (i.e. ] and ]). The template {{tl|Fellowship}} is also slightly problematic in its name grabbing, but at least its material is well suited for a navigation template. <span style="font-family:cursive">]</span> ] 06:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
:Well, using "What links here", I see that they are used in 8 and 24 articles respectively, so if you want to recycle the names you could move the templates to a better, ME-related, name (along with the page history and everything), fix the template link names on the pages where they are used, and then create new content at the "dragon" and "dwarves" templates. Do be careful about the spelling of the plural of dwarf though... Are you intending to create a more widely ranging template for dragons and dwarves? Let's see if there are lots of ] and ] articles for such wider categories? <small> OK - there are. If you want to use these names for such templates, I'm happy to help tidy things up on the Tolkien side. ] 08:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC) </small>
:About the categories, there is already ] (it is a capital 'D' because that was how Tolkien wrote it). There is no "dragon" category, as you rightly point out. But then there only seem to be four dragon articles anyway. But there probably should be a dragons category. I'll create it now. ] 08:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
::Created at ] to keep capitalisation consistent. ] 08:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 08:30, 10 October 2024

This is a WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
Shortcut
This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconMiddle-earth
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien, his legendarium, and related topics. Please visit the project talk page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles.Middle-earthWikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earthTemplate:WikiProject Middle-earthTolkien
Note: Though it states in the Guide to writing better articles that generally fictional articles should be written in present tense, all Tolkien legendarium-related articles that cover in-universe material before the current action must be written in past tense. Please see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards for more information about this and other article standards.
Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12
Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15
Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18
Archive 19

This page has archives. Sections older than 200 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Article alerts

The following list is updated daily by a bot. For manual entries, add a thread as usual at the bottom of this page.

Good article nominees

Requested moves


Maria Skibniewska

New article you may enjoy - translated b/c of my suggestion. A Polish translator of Tolkien works. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap Close to a GA level, perhaps? I could help a bit with Polish sources or such if you'd like to work on that. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
I think it's splendid: good work! But it's more like yours, you should take it to GAN, not me – all you have to do is to work in some of the Polish sources as it's already of a decent standard. In any case, as you can see above, my GAN queue stretches back six months or more, and in fact I'm successively dropping Middle-earth GANs as I work biological topics up to GA. Who knows, I might even review the article! All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Categories: