WP:PLOT states, "Wikipedia treats creative works (including, for example, works of art or fiction, video games, documentaries, research books or papers, and religious texts) in an encyclopedic manner, discussing the development, design, reception, significance, and influence of works in addition to concise summaries of those works." Over 1,200 words are devoted to summarizing the fictional appearance, where there are only 381 words in the two out-of-universe sections. The summary should be much shorter compared to the encyclopedic treatment. I also find it hard to believe that there is not more coverage about Gimli. A Good Article like Bilbo Baggins seems to be a more appropriate balance of encyclopedic treatment and concise summary. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 16:30, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks. Well, I've trimmed the 'Fictional biography' by about a third, to focus more closely on Gimli. I'd say that's not unduly long: any shorter and the account would be fragmentary, not setting the key facts about Gimli in any sort of context. To put it another way, its 800 words are a "concise summary" of 1000 pages of the primary narrative. As for the lengths of the other sections, they are what they are: Gimli is not as central a character as Bilbo. I've looked out some more scholars, and found a piece of classical music, so the secondary coverage is now definitely longer than the primary-sourced narrative. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:01, 3 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
"Writing in Mallorn, the journal of the Tolkien Society, Lilian Darvell... comments that Galadriel's refusal does not kill Fëanor, but it does result in a distancing, which might have led him to refuse to send ships to rescue her from Númenor.""
Númenor did not even exist until after Fëanor was dead. Galadriel did not go to Númenor as far as I know. If she did, and wasn't rescued from there, she would have perished in the Downfall, And that Fëanor did not get one of Galadriel's hairs did not kill him. The idea is absurd. Fëanor brought it on himself. Is this a misquote? Anyway, again, I urge that the opinions of Tolkien scholars and fans should be separated from the real writings of Tolkien, and put in a separate section that is clearly identified as opinion or scholarship. However half-assed it may be. There might also be some curating about what makes sense and what doesn't... but that's what the talk page is for. Wastrel Way (talk) Eric Wastrel Way (talk) 01:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Er, once again, you are right that you don't understand; and the reason for that is starting to become evident, as your comments reveal that you have not read the scholar's (very clear and cogent) paper, nor Tolkien's Unfinished Tales, nor indeed the section of the article itself to gain context for what you so speedily attack and dismiss. Once again, the scholarship is clearly labelled, and once again it is directly based on what Tolkien wrote. It may be helpful here to echo Christopher Tolkien's words, that the stories in UT are contradictory, and that his father made many drafts which cannot all be reconciled into one consistent narrative: that is the nature of unfinished stories, after all. As for the article, the contributions of Tolkien and the scholars are extremely clearly flagged, for those who care to see. Chiswick Chap (talk) 02:51, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
- For what it's worth, I was also confused by this sentence. Having only read LOTR and the Silmarillion, I wasn't aware of Galadriel visiting Numenor much less requiring rescuing therefrom. I take it this is from Unfinished Tales. I suppose I'll have to move this work up higher on my mutl-lifetime list of things I want to read. This line may also seem odd to others with similar Tolkien background (i.e. more than passing interest but not scholarly deep). Am I correct that the three refusals of Feanor's request also appear in the Silmarillion? If so, perhaps moving the clause "according to Unfinished Tales" to the end of this paragraph would be clearer? CAVincent (talk) 03:25, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
- It's in "The History of Galadriel and Celeborn" in Unfinished Tales. I've added that and reffed it. So I don't think that moving the ref to the end will help, indeed it'd seem strange. Actually the story is vague about the location; and Christopher Tolkien makes plain that the whole thing is a tangled mess: which doesn't mean it's not of interest, revealing Tolkien's thought. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:14, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
