Shouldn't we make the Lee Pace Thranduil picture the article's head picture? Every other article has a film picture as it's head. 18:08, September 4, 2012 (UTC)A Wiki Contributor

I'm sure we will once more official shots from the movies come out. Eli the Tanner (talk) 22:48, September 4, 2012 (UTC)

Quote Edit

I think we should add some quote from Thranduil. He must of said something powerful, or likeable somewhere in the books right? -TheDragonLord (talk) 02:07, February 9, 2013 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the suggestion. I added one that seemed appropriate. It's actually from the book, as well as being similar to something he said in the movie. - Gradivus, 01:02, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Whether Thranduil is a king or a lordEdit

Tolkien described Thranduil as an Elven-king, and he is referred to (by himself and others) as a king in the movie. So editing the page to change his description to a lord, along with an explanation of why you think that's so, is not appropriate. If you want to discuss that, please discuss it here on the Talk page instead. - Gradivus, 01:02, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

  • He is described as the Elvenking. My post however pertained to the possible romance of his son and Tauriel. As such your deletion of my edit is inappropriate. If you would like to discuss a change made, please do so here before taking acts of final authority. Your getting caught on my verbage. Lord or King is the irrelevant part as Kings are Lords. The REASON Thranduil told her their is no hope is not because he IS a King but rather that she is a Silvan Elf. There is a difference of social class and not a question of royalty. The easiest way to point this out is to make clear the origins of Oropher, Thranduil's father. Had she been a Sindarin elf there could be a romance. Silvan elves were primitive and savage compared to the Elves who flourished within the Girdle of Melian. So to be correct and cater to your desire to leave it as King, it should be changed to "Sindarin King." Lord Glorfindel of the Firstborn 14:11, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
I'm not objecting to what you wrote, only where and how you are presenting it. Canon information about the character (e.g., Thranduil) should be put at the appropriate place on the Thranduil page, as long as it comprises facts directly from the books, with a source that can be cited if necessary. It does not belong in a "spoilers" section that is specifically talking about a character in the movie. Now if you have a published article, for instance comments made in an interview by Peter Jackson, relating to the reasoning behind Thranduil's warning to Tauriel in the movie, then you are free to add that to a "background" section (after the plot narrative) on the Tauriel page, citing the interview or whatever authoritative published source it comes from. However, this Wikia has rules against putting your own personal opinions, speculation, theories or analysis on the main article pages (similar to the "No Original Research" rule in Wikipedia). There is a place for putting one's own opinion, theories or analysis, but they are not on the main pages. They should go either on the "Talk" pages of the relevant articles, or in a blog post, or in one of the pages set aside for discussion. - Gradivus, 17:07, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Elven/Irish/Mirkwood elk Edit

I pretty much agree with Darkchylde that Elven elk seems more appropriate than Megaloceros or Irish elk, unless we can find the name of the mountains in northern Mirkwood, in which case "[name of mountains] elk" would be more logical. If we use Elven elk (or the other one) we should use the same capitalization scheme as in "Cherokee pony". - Gradivus, 14:59, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Since the Silvan Elves called the range the Emyn Duir (the Dark Mountains), how would everyone feel about calling the animal an "Emyn Duir elk"? Not that there's any canon justification for assuming that the breed are particularly from the Emyn Duir, but then the entire use of the animal is non-canon anyway. - Gradivus, 15:16, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Elvenking or elf-king? Edit

   In the Houghton Mifflin Harcourt 75th anniversary edition of The Hobbit, which includes the complete unabridged text, Thranduil is referred to as the elf-king or the king before Smaug is killed. After Smaug is killed Tolkien calls him the The King of the Elves of the Wood and the Elvenking. Elsewhere in Tolkien's works, other Elven kings are referred to as either elf-kings or elven-kings. In The Lord of the Rings Tolkien uses both terms (always with a hyphen before king), although usually to refer to Gil-galad. In the chapter A Knife in the Dark Strider recites a poem whose first line is "Gil-galad was an Elven-king." Later, Frodo says, "Gil-galad was the last of the great Elf-kings of Middle-earth." Gil-galad was also referred to as an Elven-king in other chapters, including in The Shadow of the Past.
   As far as I can tell, Tolkien used the hyphenated Elven-king (as opposed to elf-king) to refer to Thranduil only once: in The Lord of the Rings, The Council of Elrond, Tolkien refers to Glóin as having old memories "stirred of his imprisonment in the deep places of the Elven-king's halls." In the same chapter, Tolkien refers to Thranduil as "the King of the Elves of Northern Mirkwood."
   - Gradivus, 18:49, December 29, 2013 (UTC)

In my version of The Hobbit (published by Del Rey Books), Thranduil is constantly referred as the Elvenking. No more, no less. He was called the king for numerous times, but never an elf-king. I trust your Houghton Mifflin Harcourt version more than mine; mine is a revised edition of The Hobbit, updated months before the first Hobbit film came out.  Darkchylde (talkcontribs) 05:14, January 5, 2014 (UTC)

I've pretty much come around to your opinion that in The Hobbit Tolkien used the title Elvenking for Thranduil (the other one he used was King of the Elves of the Wood). That's why I made it bold in the article. But look in your edition about one page before the end of chapter VIII, "Flies and Spiders," where the King is talking to Thorin. Isn't elf-king used a couple of times in the paragraph that starts, "It was also the dungeon of his prisoners"? - Gradivus, 05:47, January 5, 2014 (UTC)
Oh, you're right. I have overlooked that part. Sorry. The titles above are pretty much acceptable since we have references. The article looks good now.  Darkchylde (talkcontribs) 06:07, January 5, 2014 (UTC)

Personality & AbilitiesEdit

The sections seem to be based more on the movies than the books, especially the part when Thorin begged for help against Smaug, Thranduil turned and led his armies away from the mountain. The last paragraph is also non-canon, with Thranduil turning down Tauriel's "relationship" with Legolas. What?

I also don't buy the concealment of injuries in the Abilities section. That dragon fire stuff was only added by Peter Jackson's team. Thranduil capable of illusion?

Basically, most of the information in these sections are based on the movies. Should we do something about it, like removing some non-canon bits?  Darkchylde (talkcontribs) 04:22,1/26/2014


The reason she should not give Legolas hope is solely that she is a LOWLY SILVAN ELF. Please correct the wording and remove the bit about him being son of a King


Thranduil is the single most awesome character in the Hobbit. Just saying.


Misleading Inaccuracies in Hobbit interactions Edit

Not sure why this page is edit protected, but it's factually incorrect to say that the dwarves were treated as guests.  This section is deeply misleading:

"Subsequently, when the rest of the Dwarves had been captured by the elves, Thranduil had them unbound and treated them as his guests (save that they were not allowed to leave the caverns), until they angered him by being surly and impolite, insulting him for keeping them as prisoners, and not revealing why they had entered the forest, after which he gave them each their own cell."

The dwarves were captured as prisoners, and considered as such. They were blindfolded and bound en route, and unbound once brought before the Elvenking because the Elvenking knew that escape was impossible for anyone in his kingdom. They were questioned at length and then sent to separate cells in the dungeons. This wikia entry gives the impression that the dwarves were guests and given many liberties and, through unruly behavior, got themselves demoted to prisoners, when the text NEVER refers to them as guests and only refers to them as prisoners. Please correct this anti dwarf bias thank you!!!

Frauleinninja (talk) 02:10, March 22, 2019 (UTC)