Revision as of 07:23, 10 February 2023 editJohnalexjay (talk | contribs)5 edits →Inaccurate Reference Attribution: new sectionTag: New topic← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:07, 10 February 2023 edit undoChiswick Chap (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers297,176 edits →Inaccurate Reference Attribution: thxNext edit → | ||
Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
I think it would be better to remove that sentence completely. There is a cleaner lead to the next paragraph without it anyway. ] (]) 07:23, 10 February 2023 (UTC) | I think it would be better to remove that sentence completely. There is a cleaner lead to the next paragraph without it anyway. ] (]) 07:23, 10 February 2023 (UTC) | ||
:: Thanks for this. The relationship between the two "books" is far more complex than this, as Tolkien had been working on ] (''The Silmarillion'' writ large but unpublished, in thousands of partial drafts) since at least 1917, and built in many allusions to "Silmarillion" events in earlier ages to provide an ]. Clearly the citation is not ideal to convey this concept. I'll look out something better. ] (]) 09:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 09:07, 10 February 2023
Skip to table of contents |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Lord of the Rings article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
The Lord of the Rings is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Lord of the Rings has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 5, 2006. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
|
"Gandalf proves that Frodo's Ring is..."
The caption under the photo of the One Ring with its inscription glowing is so strange that I cannot figure out what the author was trying to say. If I could make sense of it, I'd clean it up. Perhaps someone who does understand it can do that? Jyg (talk) 23:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- I've removed the text, which was added by an IP on June 15. It made zero sense, and I can't for the life of me figure out why one relatively short sentence needed seven commas. I think the whole "this entire chunk of the article isn't in the article but is actually transcluded through a template" is really bizarre though, but maybe there's some consensus or rationale for that which I'm sure I'm unaware of. - Aoidh (talk) 23:15, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. The summary of the narrative is shared with the three articles on the individual volumes, which have their own, unshared, reception sections. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:35, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ah okay. Not the way I'd personally do it, though I do see the merits. I can't really find fault with something just because its unusual to me though. If it works it works, though there is the slight downside of the templates likely being on fewer watchlists, letting unconstructive edits through, but I've put it on my watchlist too. Hopefully nobody will add sentences, where, there, are, so, many, commas, unnecessarily, again. - Aoidh (talk) 03:50, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- I believe I inspired this arrangement. I intended to do this as a waystation on the road to the amalgamation of the three volume articles into one article for the novel. Chiswick Chap agreed with me at the time, but has since reneged. If we are not to move to one article, I don't see the point of sharing the summary of the narrative. Just saying.--Jack Upland (talk) 05:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Maybe put in Christian Novels category
JRR Tolkien said himself that The Lord of the Rings was a catholic/christian work, so should we maybe put “Christian Novels” in the category section? Thoughts. Wolfquack (talk) 01:37, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- He did, but he never called it a novel, indeed he disliked the (real world) category; and the book is devoid of religion, on the surface. So, it's an awkward fit for the category at best. Maybe not go there. Chiswick Chap (talk) 01:59, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- I agree. I think that would cause controversy and confusion.--Jack Upland (talk) 02:46, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- Eh ok, since the consensus seems no I guess I’ll leave it at that. Wolfquack (talk) 14:40, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- I agree. I think that would cause controversy and confusion.--Jack Upland (talk) 02:46, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
The Lord?
Do we have evidence that The Lord is Sauron? What rules out that the One Ring is the Lord in the title? It would be a shame to lead the article with a statement that crushes a possibly intended ambiguity 82.152.203.16 (talk) 14:38, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- Sauron is explicitly named as the Lord of the Rings by Gandalf. There used to be a note on the article to clarify, but someone's taken it out. GimliDotNet (talk) 15:46, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- See Talk:The Lord of the Rings/Archive 6#Lord of the Rings referring to Sauron? for more on this GimliDotNet (talk) 15:53, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- Annotated, as clearly helpful. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:01, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- Also see the poem, "One Ring to Rule Them All".--Jack Upland (talk) 05:53, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- Annotated, as clearly helpful. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:01, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Inaccurate Reference Attribution
Under the section "Concept and Creation", in the "Writing" subsection, the first paragraph ends with:
As the story progressed, he brought in elements from The Silmarillion mythology.
The reference for the above statement is as follows:
Rérolle, Raphaëlle (5 December 2012). "My Father's 'Eviscerated' Work – Son Of Hobbit Scribe J. R. R. Tolkien Finally Speaks Out". Le Monde/Worldcrunch. Archived from the original on 10 February 2013.
The claim "he brought in elements from The Silmarillion mythology" is not explicitly or even implicitly mentioned in the cited article. The closest related idea from the article is perhaps:
In 1937, as soon as it was published, The Hobbit immediately became a critical and popular success, to the point where its then publisher, Allen and Unwin, demanded a sequel urgently. Tolkien, though, did not wish to continue in the same vein. He had instead almost finished a narrative of the most ancient times of his universe, which he called The Silmarillion. Too difficult, decreed the publisher, who continued to harass him. The writer, a bit half-heartedly, accepted the project of writing a new story. In fact, he was about to set in place the first stone of what would become The Lord of the Rings.
But there is no indication that as the writing of the Lord of the Rings books progressed, the author leveraged more elements from the previously unfinished book. The article states the writer accepted the project of writing a new story, implying that work stopped on the previous project. No connection is stated between the contents of the previously unfinished work and the new project; it is only after stopping the old work and accepting the new project that the writer would "set in place the first stone of what would become The Lord of the Rings.".
I think it would be better to remove that sentence completely. There is a cleaner lead to the next paragraph without it anyway. Johnalexjay (talk) 07:23, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for this. The relationship between the two "books" is far more complex than this, as Tolkien had been working on his Legendarium (The Silmarillion writ large but unpublished, in thousands of partial drafts) since at least 1917, and built in many allusions to "Silmarillion" events in earlier ages to provide an impression of depth. Clearly the citation is not ideal to convey this concept. I'll look out something better. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages articles that use Oxford spelling
- Misplaced Pages articles that use British English
- Misplaced Pages former featured articles
- Misplaced Pages good articles
- Language and literature good articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- Former good article nominees
- All unassessed articles
- GA-Class Tolkien articles
- Top-importance Tolkien articles
- GA-Class Book articles
- WikiProject Books articles
- GA-Class novel articles
- Top-importance novel articles
- GA-Class Fantasy fiction articles
- Top-importance Fantasy fiction articles
- WikiProject Novels articles
- GA-Class children and young adult literature articles
- Top-importance children and young adult literature articles
- GA-Class media franchise articles
- Top-importance media franchise articles
- WikiProject Media franchises articles
- Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press