Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Middle-earth - 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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Carcharoth (talk | contribs) at 14:52, 22 September 2006 (→Article Assessment: add new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:52, 22 September 2006 by Carcharoth (talk | contribs) (→Article Assessment: add new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archive
Archives

If anyone wants to pull out or copy a previous discussion, feel free to to do so. —Mirlen 17:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Community

Role call: September

Sign your name below and comments are optional.

  1. I'm here, though since school start's tomorrow, I may have less time (the dreaded hell year has finally arrived). Currently working on getting Maedhros to G.A. status. —Mirlen 17:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  2. I've decided to join! I'm working on Maedhros too, shouldn't be too hard...also, I may randomly help start the conversion of the character bios over to the new writing for fiction standards. Judgesurreal777 21:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  3. I am lurking in the shadows... I don't think I've made any Middle-Earth edits, but someday I may emerge and actually do something relevant and/or useful (hopefully both). --Thisisbossi 01:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  4. Finally decided to join recently... Might have to slow down a bit, lots of schoolwork coming up. Uthanc 12:36, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  5. Here. Time is becoming more limited, but I'm doing what I can. -- Jordi·✆ 13:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  6. Here. Still swamped, but here. Have been doing cleanup on various Middle-earth articles. Dug up some more references on Simbelmynë which I need to add. --CBD 18:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  7. I'm here, this is my first roll call. I've been working on getting some Ted Nasmith pictures up on the site.Dhawk1964 23:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  8. Hello! New here. My main focus right now is some anime stuff, but after that I'm going to be looking for a pet project here. Otherwise I plan on perusing the articles already out there and see about doing some general clean up here and there. Elmer92413 05:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  9. Busy in real life Bryan 08:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  10. I'm still around, I've made some minor edits but school is starting in 5 days and I anticipate lots of schoolwork. I'll do whatever I can though. Nitin.viswanathan 11:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  11. I just started school today so I don't know how much I'll be able to contribute until I get a good pattern and feel of my study schedule, work load etc. Even then I don't think I can get too much done. I'm just keeping a watch on articles on my watchlist (about 36 in total not including redirects and talk pages). --Ted87 19:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  12. I'm around. Haven't had a chance to get really started on the project yet, but I'm hoping to help out as soon as I can. I'm sorta unofficially watching the Tom Bombadil article -- it's an area of interest and I like keeping on top of what happens there. Sighter Goliant 00:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  13. Well, I'm here. Then again, I just joined so does that count? Doing random fixes for now and will decide which particular path i will take in helping over the next few days. - KaoBear 01:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  14. I just joined this project and am very excited to help out. I have read the standards article and it makes sense. I can help with applying to to articles, and I am happy to team up with anyone to work on larger efforts. JordanSamuels 03:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  15. JMack 02:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  16. With school starting I have been gone for almost month. I hope to get back into Misplaced Pages soon and continue my work with tagging and FA but I it may be awhile. SorryGuy 01:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  17. Have been away for a bit, but back now. Aiming to start work on Middle-earth again soon. Carcharoth 20:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
  18. Have been away, but back now.Barnikel 03:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Issues

New Images

I was thinking about possibly getting some of the Ted Nasmith illustartions from the Silmarillion up particulary for the Manwe and Turin article. -Dhawk1964 16:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's all the information you need. I've contacted Anke and Dolfen through email before and they were generous enough to give permission — so I think that if you email Ted Nasmith he'd be fine with it, as long as you explain the whole fair use issue thoroughly in Misplaced Pages. I was also thinking of using his "Eärendil Searches Tirion" picture for the Tirion upon Túna article. In fact, it might be best to ask him how many images he'll allow to be put on Misplaced Pages if he does give permission. —Mirlen 19:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I sent an email through his website, but it said that he only respons periodicaly, so it may be a while before we have permissions. But I did explain the fair use policy. Dhawk1964 00:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Great. :) If this thread gets archived and Ted Nasmith has responded, feel free to either pull it out again, or just tell me on talk page. Thanks! —Mirlen 13:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I just got a response: "I’m happy to accept this request, yes. And yes, I guess I am curious about what specific purpose they will serve.

Regards, Ted" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhawk1964 (talk • contribs)

Awesome. Then I'm assuming that we're allowed to use his images? I'll fix the Standards page, he can check the artwork we're using in the 'Fair use' section. —Mirlen 17:44, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Yea, we can use them. I'll send him the 'Fair use' policy link.Dhawk1964 10:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I thought I saw that... it's alright, we just need to get some more up now. Dhawk1964 15:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
    • I just uploaded an image in the Tirion article. So far we've got Tirion, Balrog, Durin's Bane — anymore articles that contain Nasmith's artwork? (Remember the limit is around 5-7, so choose wisely ;).) —Mirlen 20:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
      • You forgot Gandalf - and our standards say that "Generally, there should be no more than 5-7 illustrations or photographs from the same artist in a work". Doesn't that mean we can use illustrations from the same artist for more than 7 times, just not in a single article? Uthanc 01:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
      • He has a great one of Manwe descending on Numenor, it would be nice to see that one up. Oh, and possibly one of Luthien. I like his depictions of her the best. Dhawk1964 19:32, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
        • I meant as no more than 5-7 images created by the artist (the artist's work) used in articles, but the the fair use section in Me:S needs updating and rewriting. And recently, I've seen a lot of other articles that use images of the same article more than 7 times, so I guess it's alright. I can see how my words were confusing, sorry. (I also liked Jenny Dolfen and Anke Katrin Eissman's portrayals of Luthien.) —Mirlen 17:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Middle-earth Feature Article Removal Candidate

Middle-earth is being considered for removal of its featured article status. Please go to the review and try to address the concerns. If this is not done soon it will likely lose its featured status. Joelito (talk) 14:38, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages in Quenya

There is a Quenya language Misplaced Pages on the incubator site. The 'incubator' is something Wikimedia started recently to allow proposed projects to build articles and show whether they are actually viable or not. Anyone interested in Quenya might want to check it out. --CBD 10:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

LOL! Actually written in Quenya! :-) Carcharoth 15:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm rather pessimistic whether a really good article entirely in Quenya can be made. And I am speaking as someone who knows the language very well. RashBold 22:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I thought it odd that the first attempt was with Quenya rather than Sindarin (even that would be tough), but they are making a go at it. --CBD 01:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Middle-earth article defeatured

See Misplaced Pages:Featured_article_review/Middle-earth. I tried to improve the article, but ran out of time. I think that it will be possible to improve it and resubmit it at some future date. I won't have time to do this until October, but do others have time before then to work on it? Carcharoth 10:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Standards and WP:WAF

Just discovered the existence of WP:WAF, which was created during my wikibreak, and I have now updated the Standards page to match the style guide.
New additions:

  • 1.8

Changes:

  • 2.2.1
  • 2.3.2
  • 4.1.5

Make sure to read the updated version, because there are crucial changes. —Mirlen 17:44, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Hobbits --> Hobbit_Hobbit-Issues-2006-09-08T19:38:00.000Z">

I loathe redirects. I have always felt that if you are going to link to the article, might as well link to the bread and butter and not to the packaging. i went through today and changed all the links from Hobbits to Hobbit, save where it was either archived or on a User Talk page. Yes, it was a minor thing, but in my mind it was an important step to get the articles to a GA status. - KaoBear 19:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)_Hobbit"> _Hobbit">

The standards for race articles (Tolkien-related) aren't really defined yet, but the layout should somehow follow the lines along the Elves article — for now at least. —Mirlen 20:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages standards are to put most articles at singular names. However, the redirect standards say not to update links to point straight to the main page. --CBD 20:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
There is the standards issue indeed, so I stand corrected there, however, as Mirlen said, perhaps the standards for the Tolkien related race articles should be set? - KaoBear 12:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I feel the same way as Kaobear. From some reason I just don't like clicking on redirect links. --Ted87 20:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)_Hobbit"> _Hobbit">

Hrrrmm... well ok, but if you have to change these please note that ]s produces the exact same output result as ]. --CBD 20:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
It used to bother me, but I have gotten used to it. But I think standards for race articles should be set. The first two I would think would be Etymology and History, with the former being optional. Any suggestions? —Mirlen 20:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
History is by far the more important of the two you listed, there are a few other variables as well, Prominent Individuals, Locations, etc... - KaoBear 20:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I would like to replae Prominent Individuals with simply a link to List of in the See also section. (I am currently working on a List of High Elves in my sandbox.) —Mirlen 20:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I suppose that makes sense, especially for the races which only have a few named, never mine prominent.

New toy

I created a new toy and am not quite sure what to do with it --> ].
Refresh the page / purge cache to get the link to update to a new random article. Your thoughts on how / whether this might be useful are welcome. --CBD 20:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

For me, it keeps redirecting to J. R. R. Tolkien. —Mirlen 20:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
It is a mix between Balrog and Gandalf for me, I can see the usefulness of this on a trivia page of some kind personally. A person new to the Trilogy may find it useful, or to the editor who can't quite figure out what they want to do that day. Keep up the good work! - KaoBear 20:51, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was to change. —Mirlen 17:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Headings for character articles

If you look at 2.3.2 in Me:S, the headings have been matched to follow WP:WAF and most of the G.A./F.A. fictional character articles. Since Appearances replaces Biography, and is used in a more OOU context — should we merge Portrayal in adaptations into Appearances — after all, it does describe all the character's apperances in a certain media. The only thing that makes me a little hesistant is because film, radio, and theatre are all adapatations outside the creator's work — unlike how it is with Star Wars characters or video game characters, such as Padmé Amidala and Wario. I was thinking of the following subsections under Appearances:

  1. Appearances
    1. Literature / Canon / Name of book or series
    2. Adaptations / Other media
  1. Appearances
    1. Literature / Canon / Name of book or series
    2. Adaptations
      1. Film
      2. Stage
      3. Radio
  1. Appearances
    1. Literature / Canon / Name of book or series
    2. Film

I like the first plan out of all of them. Also, in the naming of headings under the Appearances section, I think there needs to be some sort of distinction between the canon information of the character's biography and (semi) non-canon media (film, stage, radio, etc.)...or perhaps Adaptations is a sufficient name to make that kind of distinction.

Comments? —Mirlen 20:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I personally like the first style and agree that a distinction must be made between canon and non-canon materials. - KaoBear 12:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Should the names be abbreviated to Literature and Adaptations or Canon and Adaptations? —Mirlen 17:59, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
My vote is for Canon and Adaptations - KaoBear 18:05, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Canon and Adaptations it is then. —Mirlen 17:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Templates

Some time ago (if you look back in the archives), you can see that the {{ME-fact}} template was created in the likness of {{Fact}} template. I want to do the same with other Misplaced Pages templates (i.e. cleanup, expand, in-universe, etc.) — except that it would used purely for Tolkien articles (i.e. just like how there are different kinds of stub templates). The purpose in doing so is to make it easier for us to see which Tolkien articles need improvement, instead of having to sift through the massive 400+ list in categories. In short, the purpose is for organisational means. If there aren't any objections or comments, I'll take it as an affirmative to go ahead....Comments? —Mirlen 18:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Excellent idea, especially for the massive amount of In-Universe articles that need to be worked on. I say go for it and if you need any help let me know, at least what to clean up. Not so good at the templates and what not as of yet, more of a writer of articles myself, will do anything to make sure the information presented is of the best quality however. Tolkien deserves that much does he not? - KaoBear 20:48, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I made a section-stub template and put in Battle of the Morannon, but the category sorting's not working (Template:Tolkien-sectstub) Could anyone fix it? Uthanc 03:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
It's working. :) Anyway, I'll go ahead and start with making the templates. —Mirlen 17:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

New articles

I agree that Amon Hen should be Attack on Amon Hen. Note that Aragorn makes a series of judgements that turn out to be wrong, or seem wrong at the time. He doesn't actually get involved in any of the fighting, despite his best efforts.
Likewise Ambush at Ithilien, in the film it is too big to be a skirmish, while Tolkien's own account isn't clear how many fought.
As for the warg attack, it is worth mentioning. Not in Jackson, unless it was the root for the very different warg attack that was memorably shown in The Two Towers. --GwydionM 06:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Used Attack on Amon Hen and Ambush at Ithilien. Uthanc 07:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Created Minor battles in The Lord of the Rings, which includes these two plus the Warg attack in Hollin, the fight in the Chamber of Mazarbul, and the fight in the Tower of Cirith Ungol. Uthanc 06:54, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Article may be deleted

Themes in The Lord of the Rings violates "no original research" and "only use reliable sources". Also, some misinformed editor put racism charges in the article and in its talk page. (The J. R. R. Tolkien article itself has recently added a "views"section, which needs expanding/tweaking/watching, mainly to counter sweeping "Tolkien was a racist" statements.) Uthanc 03:31, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I've now removed that template. We need to keep an eye out for that sort of thing. It is a process called Proding, which is similar to deletion but only requires people to do nothing for 5 days, and then the article gets deleted. I've now removed the template, and we should expect the prodder to probably nominate it for deletion if they notice. Then the article can be defended at a proper deletion review. My view is that there is some worthwhile material there, and I would rather start from what is there, rather than delete it all and start from scratch (though I would have taken a different approach if I had started the article). As can be seen by my comments on the talk page for that article. Carcharoth 20:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
As I thought, after my de-prodding, the article is now up for a full deletion review. See Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Themes in The Lord of the Rings. There is a wide range of secondary literature on The Lord of the Rings. I agree that the current article in no way does the subject justice, but can anyone here summon the energy to defend the article in its current status? I'm going to go and make a passionate plea for the article. Carcharoth 22:59, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I have also gone to plead to the Pro-Deletioners to stay their hand. —Mirlen 01:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Article Assessment

I've noticed some article assessment stuff appearing in articles recently. I think they are intended to perform 2 funtions: (1) assess the quality of an article, and (2) assess the core importance of an article (ie. Middle-earth is more important that Eol - think of which article you would want to see published in a print version of Misplaced Pages). Are there any guidelines on how to carry out article assessements for this WikiProject? I'm going to look at the general guidelines and get started with assessing. Carcharoth 10:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

The relevant links seem to be:
And I've now found when the change took place. See this diff. Carcharoth 10:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

And now we have: Category:Top-importance_Tolkien_articles! Carcharoth 11:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

And now we have: Category:Tolkien_articles_by_quality! Carcharoth 11:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Embarassing!

More tags on the articles than text in the article. Surely someone should have cleaned this up by now? Dwarf_runes. Carcharoth 14:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)