FANDOM


Assumption/citing question

Sorry about any confusion in regard to the assumption template on the 'South' article... I planned to use the "fact" template as you mentioned, but it seems like a fair portion, if not most, of the article consists of assumptions and speculation, and as such would in theory require the template after almost every sentence. Certainly none of it is cited. Is there a procedure or other template we use to reflect such a situation? Or am I misjudging this particular article in terms of canonicity? In any case I just want to be sure I'm following the correct process in the future. --Bitterhand (talk) 19:00, June 22, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, that makes sense! I think that new template is a good idea. And if I can get my hands on one or both of those books the Atlas of Middle Earth, I'll be sure to utilize that info. Let me know if there's anything else I can assist with. --Bitterhand (talk) 22:04, June 22, 2018 (UTC)

On Mergings

I believe that the following should be merged into Weapons article. I'm not putting this up for a vote because of the historical lack of participation.

--DarkLantern (talk) 09:15, June 26, 2018 (UTC)

I agree. If there's essentially no difference between these weapons and their real-world counterparts, I see no reason to have a separate article for them. People aren't coming here to learn about generic axes and swords; that's what Wikipedia is for. The same also goes for any other common-noun articles there might be. --Bitterhand (talk) 13:18, June 26, 2018 (UTC)

Concerning Holman Greenhand

So recently I realized that some of the information in the page formerly titled "Holman Greenhand" belonged to a hobbit known as 'Holman the Greenhanded' per the Longfather tree in Appendix C. As all of the pages of his children linked to the "Holman Greenhand" page, I renamed the page "Holman the Greenhanded" since that's what the Appendix gives his name as, and to avoid confusion with his similarly-named grandson Holman Greenhand. But now I see I should probably have created a new page for Holman the Greenhanded (grandfather) and changed the relevant hyperlinks, because now I'm not able to create a separate page for "Holman Greenhand" (grandson) due to the redirect page of the same name. Is it possible to delete the redirect page, since all the hyperlinks have now been updated to the correct name? I apologize if this seems confusing and for any trouble; please let me know if you have any questions. --Bitterhand (talk) 23:04, June 26, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Kindle refs

Thanks for the tip; I hadn't noticed that before, but I'll be sure to change that accordingly when I come across it in the future. --Bitterhand (talk) 00:58, June 28, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Holman Greenhand

It's a redirect page titled simply "Holman Greenhand". Here's the url to it: https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Holman_Greenhand?redirect=no. Also, thanks for reviewing my recent edits. I've tried to stick as close as possible to what's already established as far as formatting and material go, but it's helpful to be able to go back and see which details I missed or wasn't aware of. --Bitterhand (talk) 00:44, June 29, 2018 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! I'll create the new page shortly. Also, quick question: is there an agreed-upon policy for distinguishing article titles for two identically named characters? (e.g May Gamgee and May Gamgee). I ran into that a couple of times creating new pages for the Cotton and Gamgee hobbits, and differentiated them as "Hobson's daughter" and "Hamfast's daughter" for example. Is that appropriate, or do we usually do something else? --Bitterhand (talk) 01:07, June 29, 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Background Image

I'm not sure where to post this suggestion, so I'll just send it to you if that's okay.

This is about the background picture... The Wiki is in English, which is a left-to-right language. On every page, our eyes start on the left. There are more words and content to the left side than the right.

The background picture has all the bad guys on the left. When reading this wiki, my peripheral vision sees them far more than the good guys on the right.

My request? Could you please flip the picture horitzontally so the good guys are mostly in our vision and the bad guys aren't?

I know, wierd request, but I hope you'll consider it. Thanks.

69.47.235.105

On references

Without a references guide of any kind how is one supposed to easily make a citation? Or aren't you finished yet. I personally believe that a new and refined references guide should be drawn up. Whether or not it is divided up into sections made up of separate pages. A lot of work went into that guide!--DarkLantern (talk) 18:13, July 1, 2018 (UTC)

Your guide instructions were not really confusing! I guess I was trying to argue for the breaking-up of the Gradivus style guide into parts. The reason I still support it is because I guess I prefer a spelled out cut and paste list of the chapters for the convenience of things. Something that I or others can keep in another window or tab and cut and paste from out of it. This is how I was using it!
Well, I guess we will see how things work out with your guide. I don't want this to become an argument because that is unproductive. All I ask is that you not dismiss all or some of my suggestions above.--DarkLantern (talk) 02:31, July 2, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Citations Guide

I think it's actually pretty readable; though I do tend to use a lot of clarifiers and parenthetical phrases in my writing. The only thing that isn't clear to me is when/if book titles (i.e the Two Towers) are italicized. I think if you were to make that a little clearer it would be helpful. And also, thanks for the heads-up! --Bitterhand (talk) 22:22, July 1, 2018 (UTC)

Odd page

Just a quick note whenever you have time to look at it. I found this page earlier and was wondering if you know what it was supposed to be, or if it needs to be deleted. I just thought it was odd since it didn't have an edit button, but I would guess it can be deleted since it doesn't link to anything. In any case, thanks! --Bitterhand (talk) 19:12, July 2, 2018 (UTC)

Re: The Referencing Guide

Mae Govannen, HiddenVale. Thanks for leaving the link to your referencing guide on my talk page. I think it's readable and easy to understand, although leaving examples of the way each reference appears when done correctly would be helpful. Thanks for consulting my opinion! ;)

Jsclingman2 "ℌ𝔦𝔰 𝔏𝔬𝔳𝔢 𝔑𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔯 𝔉𝔞𝔦𝔩𝔰!" (𝙻𝚎𝚊𝚟𝚎 𝙼𝚎 𝙰 𝙽𝚘𝚝𝚎) 17:01, July 3, 2018 (UTC)

Gandalf's Fireworks

Just wanted to offer a little clarification on the "Gandalf's Fireworks" section in Articles to be merged, as I realized it may be sort of confusing. For some reason there are two separate but very similar pages for this, and the website only shows one of them as an option to link to. The only way I can figure out to link to both of them is by including the urls: https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Gandalf%27s_Fireworks, and https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Gandalf’s_Fireworks. Not sure how there got to be two identically named articles, but in any case it's not a major issue. Just wanted to share so to avoid any confusion! Thanks, --Bitterhand (talk) 02:03, July 6, 2018 (UTC)

Great, I'm glad we could get that resolved. And I think I see what you mean with the whole tense deal; I'll try to implement that in the future. --Bitterhand (talk) 22:20, July 6, 2018 (UTC)


Various questions

There were a few things I've noticed/been wondering about, and wanted to mention or get your opinion on.

1. The 'Quest for Erebor' non-canon campaignbox seems to mix canon and non-canon events. This wouldn't be a problem, except canon pages (i.e Destruction of Lake-town) have the same template, and thus people looking only for canon events can be directed to movie-only events. Also, some of the articles linked to in the same template have the non-canon alert even though the event happened in the book (i.e Attack of the Spiders), but in my opinion that alert could be removed, or the page merged with its book counterpart if there is one. Do you think there's a good solution to this? I would suggest making a separate template for a sequence of book-only events, then keep the current one as-is, but there may be something better.

2. https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Citation_needed This template appears to have been a mistake, and I think can be deleted, especially since it doesn't appear on any pages.

3. The Fandom category. I know most of the pages here are probably allowed to remain even though the wiki policy says fandom is not allowed, but I think the https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Fan_videos page and the https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/The_Return_of_the_Lord_of_the_Rings_to_the_Two_Towers page we might need to look at again. The former seems to me sort of unnecessary (maybe move the relevant videos to the videos link). If it were just up to me, I would delete the latter since it isn't an adaptation but a parody, not to mention including some questionable content and a couple of highly inappropriate external links towards the end of the synopsis. In any case, I believe it contains far too much detail on the subject and should at least be shortened to a brief description of what it is.

4. Is the Grond article editable only by admin? I noticed at least one error but was unable to correct it.

5. What is our policy on articles beginning with "The"? I've noticed that some articles don't include it (Mouth of Sauron) and some do (The Hammer of Sauron). Does it depend on what it's describing, or is one preferable to the other?

Sorry if any of this is hard to understand, but I just wanted to ask/bring it to light. Also, please don't feel rushed to respond or that I'm demanding for any of this to be done; I just didn't want to do anything major without getting approval first. Thanks! --Bitterhand (talk) 22:04, July 10, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Various Questions

Always glad to help; thanks for the response. And I didn't even realize there was a difference between fandom and fanon. Glad you cleared that up! :) I'll start on fixing the aforementioned issues soon. I also have a suggestion that we move the page Men of Rhudaur to a portrayals in adaptations section in the page Hill-men. The latter page contains an image of the former, and the former states that the men of Rhudaur are simply Hill-men living in Rhudaur. Thanks! Bitterhand (talk) 14:18, July 11, 2018 (UTC)

Articles to be deleted and merged

Just wanted to mention there are quite a few blank/duplicate articles - eleven, I think - that another user discovered and put into the articles for deletion category. It looks like there's several images as well to be deleted that look to have been there for a while. Also, I discovered another duplicate page of Isumbras Took III which I put in the articles to merge page. P.S. I now realize what I was doing wrong with regard to references; I was following the references guide and thought the quotes included went with the actual reference. So, glad you cleared that up. Thanks! --Bitterhand (talk) 02:58, July 13, 2018 (UTC)

Hill-trolls

I just noticed that the Hill-troll article is listed as non-canon, even though Appendix A mentions them as having killed Arador the grandfather of Aragorn. Do you have any objections to me removing the non-canon tag and moving the info in the article to a Portrayal in adaptations section? Also, I noticed that the titles of some of the troll articles are plural (Mountain-trolls; Snow-trolls), and the rest are singular (Hill-troll). Is one or the other more correct? It seems to me we should keep them all the same at least for continuity's sake. There are probably a lot of other non-troll articles with the same potential issue as well. Thanks! --Bitterhand (talk) 20:53, July 15, 2018 (UTC)

A few other questions and notes

Just had a few other various things I've noticed and wanted to mention:

1. How do we determine which characters/places are precanonical? In my mind, pages such as Rimion would qualify, since Bregor is later established to be Beren's grandfather, and both can't be correct in the finished canon. Probably Idis as well. Maybe my understanding isn't quite correct, but I just wanted to make sure.

2. I took the liberty of organizing many of the "unknown category" templates, but there are 14 or 15 left that are protected and I am unable to make any changes. It appears they should go into the "data" category as there are some similar templates there. It may not be all that important, but just wanted to mention. Also pertaining to the family tree templates, in https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Complete_Line_of_Tooks the links to Isengrim III and Isumbras IV appear to be broken, but I am also unable to edit the template.

3. Is there anything we can do about the "non-portable infoboxes" linked to on the right side of the recent activity page? It says converting is supposed to make the template compatible on mobile devices as well, and I can confirm at least one doesn't show up right on a mobile phone. I previewed converting one, but it seemed to mess up the original template, so just wanted to mention that as well.

4. For pages of rivers in Beleriand, I noticed some have the RiversofArda template, and a few have only the RiversofBeleriand template. Is one of these preferrable to the other, since Beleriand is included in Arda and all info in the RiversofBeleriand template is included in the one for Arda?

5. Might we ought to have separate pages for "Erebor" and the "Lonely Mountain"? In my understanding Erebor refers primarily, if not exclusively, to the dwarven city within/underneath the actual mountain, while "The Lonely Mountain" refers to the geological mountain, which would have had to have existed prior to the dwarves' discovery of it. Just a thought.

6. A couple more pages I found and put in Articles for deletion and Articles to merge. I didn't add The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth (List of units) since it very well may be allowed to remain, but it seems maybe more like the kind of thing that belongs on the Wiki for Middle-earth.

7. For the tengwar script template we have at the beginning of important articles (i.e Peregrin Took), the background is still white and looks clunky against the light gray wiki background. I remember when the skin changed a few years ago thus creating this problem, but I think it would look more professional if we were to match the template background with the article background. I feel like there's a relatively simple way to do this with wikitext, but I couldn't figure it out. Do you know if that's possible?

Again, no hurry to respond to any of this, and thanks for your help! Bitterhand (talk) 16:41, July 17, 2018 (UTC)

On second thought, the background on the mobile interface is still white, so perhaps there's a way to make the Tengwar template have a clear background? If not I suppose it isn't a big deal. --Bitterhand (talk) 22:54, July 17, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, all that makes sense. Here's the link to where I was finding the templates: https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Templates. There are also some family trees here: https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Templates?type=design that appear to be in the wrong category.

Also, one other thing I wanted to mention, and this is just an idea that I've had for a while after seeing something similar at other places such as the Narnia wiki. For persons/things that are given no official name by Tolkien, but are later given names in non-canonical sources (the example I have in mind is Dain Ironfoot's red axe, called Barazanthual in the Battle for Middle-earth I think), there is the possibility we could have a canon article for the axe with the non-canonical title. The item itself is canon since Tolkien referenced it, but we could both avoid having two articles for the same thing and using the conjectural title notice. I made the following template for fun as what the notice might could look like if we were to do that, but in any case it's just a suggestion that I thought it might be kind of neat. Thanks again! --Bitterhand (talk) 01:18, July 18, 2018 (UTC)

! The title of this article is non-canon.
While the content of this article is based on canonical information, the subject is never officially named in canon, and the actual name of the subject originates in a non-canonical source.
!

Thanks for the response. I completely agree when you put it that way... In light of that I guess it was sort of a silly suggestion. Good points about our universe being preceded and created by the Word and about the game producers being able to name stuff whatever they want. I've never actually played the Battle for Middle-earth, so I don't really have an affinity for it; and I would agree it's much better to not do what I suggested. --Bitterhand (talk) 12:19, July 18, 2018 (UTC)

Vandals

Just a heads up, User:PreSerumSteve, User:96.48.177.33 and User:24.129.165.118 have been vandalizing several pages over the last few hours. I've undone the harmful edits but they probably still need to be blocked. --Bitterhand (talk) 19:40, July 19, 2018 (UTC)

Other questions

I came up with several more questions over the last week, so I thought it would be best to bring them to your notice. I appreciate you taking the time to respond!

1. I have a suggestion to slightly modify the "stub" template. There's several articles I've noticed, such as several of the dwarves from The Hobbit, where the biography/history section needs to be expanded but not necessarily the rest of the article. Would you be open to amending the stub template to the following, or something similar?

Boromir2 "So small a thing. Such a little thing!"
This article or section is a stub; please expand it if you can.

This way, it can be used for both entire articles and individual sections, and could be used as an "expand" notice if a certain part needs to be elaborated on.

2. Following up on a question I asked a few weeks ago, should we add "The" to the titles of articles such as Mouth of Sauron and Mouth of Dol Guldur? Or remove them from articles such as The Hammer of Sauron and The Hand of Saruman? It appears the policy on Wikipedia is to exclude "The", but I wasn't sure if we adopt the same here.

3. I noticed we have an article for Faramir's sword. In light of your most recent response, should we delete this, since the sword isn't named and doesn't directly impact the story in any way?

4. I left a comment on Talk:Troll Purses which pretty much explains my thinking about this article. I've personally never seen anything to suggest what's currently written in the article is actually the case.

5. Not a huge deal here, but in line with regular encyclopedia standards, I changed the titles of the troll articles to singular as opposed to plural (hill-troll instead of hill-trolls), but there's a redirect page to Mountain-trolls titled "Mountain-troll", which prevents changing the title.

6. Speaking of the previous issue, I noticed that we have no articles for two chapters from The Fellowship of the Ring (novel): The Bridge of Khazad-dûm, and The Breaking of the Fellowship. I was also unable to create these, since for some reason identically-named redirect pages already exist. Can these be deleted? I can't see any reason why either of these need to redirect to the novel page, and it seems to have created a problem with the relevant hyperlinks.

7. Do you know why the deceased actors category keeps appearing when editing a living actor page? I created the article for John Tui today, and added the category even though I hadn't selected it, and there seems to be no way to get rid of it. I think Cate Blanchett has the same issue.

8. What are your thoughts about having separate articles for a character's title, for example Elbereth, simply another name for Varda? I've seen a few others, but I can't recall them at the moment. It seems to me that these should be merged and have the original title page redirect there, but perhaps there's valid reasoning for it.

9. Added merge suggestions for Hind, Badgers, and Middle-earth animals with List of animals. I don't really see a reason to have separate page for a female deer when "deer" is already in the larger list, and "badgers" can be included for the same reasons all the other animals are.

10. The article for Ered Glamhoth has no non-canon alerts or categories, but I have been unable to find any canonical source for this name; the only places it is referenced seem to be The Lord of the Rings Online and Middle-earth: Shadow of War. Do you have any idea about this? Also, are you familiar at all with the "rare map of Mordor"? There's a category for this with a grainy image, but I've been unable to find any references or info on it either.

11. One final thought; what do you think about creating a notice template for pre-canonical articles? My reasoning is that if an article has no notices or alerts, it should be safe to assume as an actual canonical thing (to use your analogy, in-universe "fact" as opposed to "fiction", as clear non-canon topics are). In my mind, things that are pre-canonical and have thus been replaced with something else are no longer "fact" in the most up-to-date version of the legendarium, as Tolkien discarded the idea. As you said, it is not "non-canon" since it still originates from Tolkien, but I think it might be good to make the differentiation a little clearer for the casual reader. The template could possibly look something like this:

! This article is pre-canonical.
While the content of this article is based on official information, it consists of information that was replaced or heavily revised in later versions of the legendarium.
!

That's just an idea of course; it could just as easily be something less attention-catching.

I know this is a lot of info, so don't feel hurried to respond. I'm interested to hear your thoughts, and thanks again for your assistance! --Bitterhand (talk) 02:18, July 25, 2018 (UTC)

Awesome! One other question; how do I revert the renaming of an article? I had already changed quite a few of these to the singular form, and I can't see how to undo that, since there are plural redirect pages now. --Bitterhand (talk) 02:16, July 26, 2018 (UTC)

Oh, wanted to ask this as well; do you think anything that only appears in the Book of Lost Tales (such as the Cottage of Lost Play and related things) can/should be considered pre-canon? It seems that most if not all of those stories were abandoned/replaced/heavily revised later on. Or should the category only apply to things that were directly replaced? --Bitterhand (talk) 02:27, July 26, 2018 (UTC)

I thought that might be the case, so good to know. Also, will an admin have to revert/change the singularized page titles? I still can't find a way to fix that. --Bitterhand (talk) 12:18, July 26, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry about the trouble! --Bitterhand (talk) 22:10, July 26, 2018 (UTC)

Non-canon Nazgul

What do you think about deleting the pages for the Nazgul identities created by the Games Workshop (i.e. The Dark Marshal, The Betrayer, etc.)? Essentially all the info on those pages is already included in the relevant section on the Nazgul page. Bitterhand (talk) 14:02, July 27, 2018 (UTC)

I checked and ensured all the info and pictures were already at Nazgûl, so these seven articles should be ready to delete. I'd be happy to do it myself, but I don't have the option to do so. Is it only admin that are able to delete pages? Or is there another level of access available? --Bitterhand (talk) 21:59, July 27, 2018 (UTC)

Great, that needed taking care of. Also, just a note that The Tainted still needs to be deleted. --Bitterhand (talk) 02:19, July 28, 2018 (UTC)

Various things

Thanks for bringing up that about Uglúk; I previously removed the Servants of Sauron category, but didn't want to get in an edit war when that user replaced it.

Also was wondering; should we/do we have an infobox for real people who aren't actors? I've noticed several pages such as Emilíana Torrini that have the actor infobox and thus put them in the category for actors from that nationality, which I would imagine needs to be rectified.

And what do you think about the article for Nazg? To be consistent, we would either need to add all the other Black Speech words from the Ring poem, or delete it.

Thanks! --Bitterhand (talk) 00:15, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. Speaking of consistency, Dragon, Ent, and Warg need to be pluralized in the titles, as they were the only other race articles that had conflicting redirects. I've ensured the rest of the race articles are corrected. Also, I've added a few things to the Merge and Deletion categories. --Bitterhand (talk) 00:37, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

Re:

Ah yes, thanks for bringing that up. I used that category since it was already created, but I'll go back and add the corrected one to those pages. Also, I added a couple of new issues to the merge forum; if you could see what you think about those, that would be great. --Bitterhand (talk) 01:29, August 3, 2018 (UTC)

Ugluk

I put him in the category Servants of Sauron for a non-canon reason. In the books he a commander of the Isengard Uruk-hai soldiers sent by Saruman who is the Dark Lord's official ally while he secretly seeks the Ring for himself. But in the films Saruman serves Sauron thus if Ugluk serves Saruman he also serves Sauron. It's like a chain-of-command in Isengard in the films. Sauron is the Overlord, Saruman second-in-command and Ugluk like third-in-command (only for the Peter Jackson adaptation of The Lord of the Rings). So it's non-canon. If you wish to remove it's fine to me. Is there a problem that it's not canon?SwtorPlayer (talk) 10:12, August 5, 2018 (UTC)

Mordor locations

Before I go any further, should we have Non-canonical Mordor locations in addition to the Locations by the Landofshadow.com, since the latter is included with the former? --Bitterhand (talk) 23:11, August 7, 2018 (UTC)

Got it, that makes a lot of sense. One other quick question: for the non-canon character infobox, should we edit it so the only actor/voice actor option isn't under "Peter Jackson's film trilogies"? There are, obviously, quite a few non-canon characters portrayed by actors not from Peter Jackson's trilogies; 'Born of Hope' or various video games for instance. Or another possibility I guess would be to make the current one specifically for PJ's films, and make another more generic infobox. Just thought I'd bring it to your attention. --Bitterhand (talk) 00:49, August 8, 2018 (UTC)

Ah, my mistake. It's the servants of evil infobox; such as in Bolg, with the same issue. The elves of Rivendell infobox as in Arwen has the same issue now that I look at it, and is, by the way, misspelled. --Bitterhand (talk) 01:05, August 8, 2018 (UTC)

Sauron's Fortress & Strongholds

Shouldn't Angband be in this category? For a time it was Sauron's fortress while Morgoth himself lived in Utumno before his return and theft of the Silmarils. After that Morgoth took Angband as his own. What do you say?SwtorPlayer (talk) 07:32, August 9, 2018 (UTC)

New issues

Just a few things I've noticed recently:

1. This user: "Quimirluna" recently moved the Moria page to "Khazad-dum", something I wouldn't ordinarily be opposed to, but our own policy page specifically states it should be Moria and not Khazad-dum, in keeping with the most common usage. Not sure if this is a big deal or not.

2. There's a couple of articles in both LOTR:Articles to be merged and LOTR:Articles for deletion that may have been overlooked.

3. Have you ever heard of a Inigo Baggins? I never have, and this page may be a candidate for deletion.

4. What is your opinion on the precise canonicity of The New Shadow? I know that this being a book-first wiki means that "canon" is anything in-universe that Tolkien wrote, but to me at least, the fact that he quickly abandoned the story because he specfically realized he disliked the premise seems to suggest we should include a caviat of some kind on characters/topics from that story. I don't know if that would be a simple notice, or a "Post-canon" category, or something else. Just my thoughts.

What are your thoughts on creating different pages for Fili and Kili? Judging from the title of the current article's talk page, this has come up before, but there seems to be several other users who also think they should have separate articles. As noted there, the characters have different pages on the Tolkien Gateway, and quite frankly, I think it makes more sense even if they are always mentioned together in the book, especially following The Hobbit films where they are given more individual personalities and stories. As I've never been a fan of putting two or more characters into one article, I'd also support different pages for Elladan and Elrohir, though that may be a somewhat different case from what I've already mentioned.

Thanks again! Let me know if you have any other questions or comments. Bitterhand (talk) 14:18, August 15, 2018 (UTC)

LOTR:Administrators

Hey, just wanted to let you know that the final paragraph of the first section of LOTR:Administrators is outdated. Wikia janitors have been renamed to VSTF (stands for Volunteer Spam Task Force—see the help page). Just thought you might want to know so you could fix it. Cheers, Patrik 22:51, August 20, 2018 (UTC)

Doesn't matter if it looks terrible,it needs to be said

Looks terrible?

The change in TLotR text about Aragorn's age has implications about the age of Arvegil that need noting.A "looks terrible" impression on your part doesn't change that.12.144.5.2 05:20, August 22, 2018 (UTC)


Responded hereHiddenVale - HV logo TalkPage 00:41, August 23, 2018 (UTC)

Herumor (Fourth Age)

If he led a cult that worshipped the Dark Lords Morgoth and Sauron alongside Saruman of Many Colours shouldn't he be put in the categories Servants of MorgothServants of Sauron  and Agents of Saruman. Even if he hadn't been there to actually serve them he still worshipped them. What do you say? Have a nice day!SwtorPlayer (talk) 19:15, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

Vandal

Hello, could you please consider giving this vandal a block? Thanks. Patrik 19:59, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

My recent edits

I have just edited lots of articles but have realised that in Appendix B, in Shire Reckoning, SR 1541 is FO 120, which corresponds to SR 1540 in the Year template. Is there something wrong with my edits as some articles, I saw, were one year different from Appendix B ? I’m sorry for the inconveniences, SamtheHobbitoftheShire (talk) 14:54, August 30, 2018 (UTC)

RE: Small thing

Oh, my bad! Thank you for catching that. I have fixed that and re-added the rest of my edits. Patrik 00:04, September 2, 2018 (UTC)

Image Categories

What categories should I add to this image and this image? Patrik 19:49, September 2, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I have done as you said. Patrik 22:10, September 2, 2018 (UTC)

Vandal

Please consider blocking this vandal. Patrik 13:00, September 5, 2018 (UTC)

Another. Patrik 01:54, September 6, 2018 (UTC)
Another. Patrik 11:45, September 7, 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hello there, I want to infrom you that this IP has vandalized pages here. Could you review their contributions and take any necessary actions? Thanks!

I've undone the damage done by this user, but I actually think they may not be intentionally vandalizing these pages. Most of the actual edits appear to be relevant or in good faith, and information was somehow deleted in several cases. Might want to clarify with the user first before blocking him. Bitterhand (talk) 13:48, September 6, 2018 (UTC)

Couple of questions

Could you delete this redirect so that a page with the same name can be created? The redirect's title is the name of a separate soundtrack from the complete recordings of the Fellowship of the Ring, but links to the corresponding track from the original recordings (The Prophecy). Since in every other case we have separate articles, I thought it would be best to keep that continuity.

Also, is it possible to rename categories without creating a wholly new one? I ask since this [1] category contains only film soundtracks, which I take not to be actually non-canon but instead real-world, for the same reason we don't label the film articles as non-canon. If possible, I think we should consider renaming it, but if not, don't worry about it. That would be a huge project to create and update every soundtrack page with a new category.

Thanks! --Bitterhand (talk) 03:14, September 8, 2018 (UTC)

Great, thanks. I've recreated the correct article for the soundtrack. Have a great week as well! --Bitterhand (talk) 17:24, September 11, 2018 (UTC)

Template:T

Hey there, I've got a simple proposal for you. At present, Template:T doesn't even work like it's supposed to (example of how it's supposed to work); at present it really doesn't do anything. I'd like to clean up so that it actually works like the example above. I'd just like to make sure that's ok with you. :) Patrik 02:07, September 12, 2018 (UTC)

Excellent, will do tomorrow. Patrik 02:11, September 12, 2018 (UTC)
Done. Can you please delete Template:T/piece and Template:T/piece/doc? Both are unnecessary since the new version of Template:T uses Module:T instead of another template to function. I've already cleared Special:Whatlinkshere for them. Thanks! Patrik 14:04, September 12, 2018 (UTC)

Questionable pages

Just wanted to get your thoughts on this page and this page. I don't think either topic really deserves a page, though the list of upgrades article might could be whittled down and merged into the main game article. I see no reason at all to have a page for female hobbits; we don't have articles for female elves, dwarves, etc.

Also, it looks to me that List of animals should be merged with Middle-earth animals in some manner, as well as the Badgers article. It doesn't really make sense to have two similar pages about this.

Let me know if you have any questions! --Bitterhand (talk) 16:23, September 24, 2018 (UTC)

Ecthelion II of Gondo

Hello HiddenVale I created an article called Ecthelion II of Gondo which was supposed to be a redirect page as when linking to Ecthelion II this came up. I attempted to redirect it, however it has not worked and a useless article has now been created. I am sorry for the inconvenience, SamtheHobbitoftheShire (talk) 16:17, September 25, 2018 (UTC) It has actually just sorted itself out. Thank you, SamtheHobbitoftheShire (talk) 16:42, September 25, 2018 (UTC)

Profile Tags

Please remove the Wikia Community Council tag from Jiskran, as they are no longer a member of Council. Thanks! Patrik 21:01, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

Done, but I've actually read the reverse. Linking like [[Pineapple]]s is more efficient wikitext than [[Pineapple|Pineapples]]. Patrik 21:43, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

Bot

Hello, at present there is a template, {{Space}}, which does literally nothing. Apparently it was added by bots a while back and does not affect the page in any way. However, it clutters up a page's wikitext and is useless, so I'd like to remove it. If you think that's a good idea, could you ask FANDOM Staff to give my bot a bot flag in order to perform this action? Just to show that I know what I'm doing, here are a few examples of what I've done with my bot on other wikis:

Anyway, once I perform this task I could also do some other actions, after checking with you, such as replacing [[<pagename>]] with '''<pagename>''' (as this is a bad practice). Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns, as flagging a user as a bot is not something to be taken lightly. Thank you for your consideration! Patrik 22:48, September 26, 2018 (UTC)

Excellent. I see the rights have already been added, so I will get started tomorrow. Thanks! Patrik 21:56, September 30, 2018 (UTC)
Hahahaha, one time they sent this. :P Patrik 12:23, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

List of animals

I've merged the Middle-earth animals article into List of animals in the best way I could determine; if it looks good to you then the former article should be ready to delete. If not, just revert the edit and we can figure out another option. Bitterhand (talk) 20:50, September 28, 2018 (UTC)

Visual Editor

May I ask why you still use Visual Editor? Source editor is a lot more powerful, supports clean wikitext, loads faster, and results in greater editing efficency. I highly recommend that you enable it in Preferences. It takes a bit of getting used to but is a worthwhile investment. Patrik 12:30, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

Hobbit families and users

Just wanted to ask about a couple of things that occurred to me recently. First, should the title for a page about a certain Hobbit family be pluralized, or not? Some (Bolgers, Brandybucks) are pluralized, while the rest are singular (Boffin, Cotton). I'll be happy to standardize them to whichever option is preferable.

Also, is it acceptable to change categories on others' user pages when appropriate? I understand that it isn't allowed to edit the user pages themselves (nor do I have a desire to do so); however I only ask because I've noticed that there are at least several users in the "Active Contributors" category that have been inactive for over (or well over) three years. There are several other, mostly inactive, users that have superfluous categories as well.

Let me know if you have any questions!--Bitterhand (talk) 22:50, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

Infobox issues

Couple of quick things, firstly regarding the person infobox. I've noticed it includes the "characters" category, which is fine in most cases, but rather out of place on the article for Tolkien. It also appears on the articles for a few other real people, which can be seen in the following link: [2] I recall you said that real people shouldn't have infoboxes, but it seems that in Tolkien's case it is warranted, especially with the amount of relevant information in it. Might we create an infobox specifically for real-world individuals? On a side note, several of the templates at the bottom of the page here: [3] appear to warrant deletion, since they have been superseded by other infoboxes and aren't used on any pages.

Hope this makes sense; let me know if you have any questions. By the way, do you know what happened to the skin/background? I'm not sure what it's supposed to be showing. --Bitterhand (talk) 01:24, October 10, 2018 (UTC)

Also, forgot to mention there appears to be an issue with the actors infobox again, as seen on the Tom Walsh page, with the category appearing at the start of the article. I tried to fix the template code, but I couldn't seem to figure it out. Just wanted to give you a heads up on that. --Bitterhand (talk) 12:43, October 10, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind message! I will do that definitely. I'm not at all savvy about how this site works yet sorry. Cheers.Roac's Wife (talk) 22:06, October 11, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Literature tiers

Cool, sounds like a good idea to me. I'll add it to the books I know off the top of my head and then as I come across the others. In related topics, what should The New Shadow be categorized as, since it was never finished and never fully published? Have a good day, --Bitterhand (talk) 13:34, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

Reviewing our edits?

Are you really reviewing our edits? :P

Daryurian (The Mighty Turian) 06:46, October 19, 2018 (UTC)

Vandal

Hi I don’t know where I should leave the message but can you block this vandal? https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/User:MadIsOnNeRDY He deleted Hobbits and wrote actors’ names. Thanks, SamtheHobbitoftheShire (talk) 09:09, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

I’ve undone what he did. SamtheHobbitoftheShire (talk) 09:10, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

I’ve just found two more vandals: https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/216.159.104.204 https://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/168.8.216.250 The first added an inappropriate phrase and the second (168.8.216.250) corrected “to” to “too”. Does that count as vandalism? Block the first and please decide on the second. SamtheHobbitoftheShire (talk) 17:54, October 23, 2018 (UTC)

I caught this IP vandalising on “Stumpy” sectioni in Guldur Olog-hai

Undid the edit and please block him.

SamtheHobbitoftheShire (talk) 07:21, October 26, 2018 (UTC)

BOTFA category

All the images from the old category have been moved to the new one. I think we can go ahead and delete the original category, since we might as well correct the name if we decide to make a category for images solely from the battle itself. Also, the following categories need to be deleted as well as they are empty and have been replaced: [[4]], [[5]], [[6]]. Have a good day! --Bitterhand (talk) 14:34, October 24, 2018 (UTC)

Bot Update

Hey, I've removed {{Space}} from about 720 articles. You can review my contributions here if you wish. I must apologize for how long it took, but the template had been added in such a way that I had to make my edits semi-manually. Besides removing this template, I also took the opportunity to do some minor formatting. In addition, I removed and added many "External Links" headers based on if they had any links below them or not. If you could delete Template:Space, as well as Template:Botremoved, that would be great. I've already cleared Whatlinkshere for them and marked them for deletion. In a few days I'll hopefully run my bot to fix a few minor things (e.g. {{Template: -> {{). Patrik 15:50, October 30, 2018 (UTC)

No problem. Patrik 11:35, October 31, 2018 (UTC)
Did you ever get a chance to delete those two templates? Patrik 17:29, November 12, 2018 (UTC)

Thoughts on canonicity

I posted a message on LOTR talk:Canon about this; just wanted to see what you thought. Thanks! Bitterhand (talk) 19:55, October 30, 2018 (UTC)

Canonicity

In regard to my earlier message about canonicity, DarkLantern cleared up some confusion I may have had, since for some reason I had forgotten that what was finished of The New Shadow was later published in The Peoples of Middle-earth; my mistake. In my understanding, though, there is still discussion on whether or not it should be considered canon, along with things from The Book of Lost Tales that are clearly from a point where Tolkien had a different view of his legendarium. Our policy seems to say that we consider "canon" anything Tolkien put down on paper pertaining to Middle-earth, and I have no problem with that. I do think, though, that it's impossible to say for sure what Tolkien himself believed in regard to the "canonicity" of his earlier writings by the point at which he wrote The Lord of the Rings. With that in mind, I think it might be a good idea to include a small notice on ostensibly relevant articles that there is discussion as to the status of the content, something possibly akin to the attached template.

For reference, the Tolkien Gateway has a similar category ([7]) containing what they consider disputed material. Please understand I'm not saying we have any obligation to copy what TG does (we don't); I only mention it as an illustration.

I also just want to be clear that I'm not demanding this or saying it's a necessary idea, because it's just that, an idea. I don't want to beat a dead horse, just wanted to make sure I clearly expressed my opinion. Please feel free to disagree or let me know with any thoughts or comments. Thanks, and I appreciate the feedback! Bitterhand (talk) 20:40, November 2, 2018 (UTC)

! The canonicity of this article is disputed.
The content of this article is of uncertain or disputed canonicity. To find out about what is considered "canon" see LOTR:Canon.
!

I think that topics from works such as The Adventures of Tom Bombadil would certainly qualify (the article itself even says so), since it's not clear if the places/beings mentioned are real or imaginary. There's quite a bit of material from The Peoples of Middle-earth and The Book of Lost Tales that, while not explicitly replaced by anything, seems fairly logical to me to assume that Tolkien moved on from (Pixies, Sprites). I would also consider things involving characters that are clearly pre-canon (Ælfwine) to be disputed, since without the pre-canon character there wouldn't really be much of a story there (The Cottage of Lost Play). I hope this makes sense, and again this is simply my opinion. We certainly have to be careful labeling things, but in this case we'd just be saying "we're not sure", as opposed to "this is not canon". --Bitterhand (talk) 21:29, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

Do you think that Roverandom and Farmer Giles of Ham would fall under disputed canonicity, or simply not connected to the "canon"? The texts do contain some allusions to Middle-earth, but it seems pretty obvious they weren't intended to be a part of the main continuity. Obviously, works like Mr. Bliss, Smith of Wootton Major, and probably Leaf by Niggle were never intended to be part of Middle-earth, so I can't see any controversy/uncertainty there. Bitterhand (talk) 21:13, November 5, 2018 (UTC)

Real

Hello! Right now we have {{Real}}, which adds a small icon to the left hand side of pages that are about "real world" things. The problem is that right now it tends to overlap with text and images, resulting in a strange appearance, not to mention making it harder to see. Here's an example of this happening. However, there's a pretty simple way for us to solve this issue: import the EraIcons script. This will move the icon above the page header, putting it in a logical and easily-seen spot that won't overlap with the page's content. If you think this is a good idea, just add dev:EraIcons/code.js to MediaWiki:ImportJS and I can handle the rest. Thank your for consideration and have a great day! Patrik 19:48, November 6, 2018 (UTC)

Hey, I've implemented the script, although I did forget one part. Please add window.useIncludedStylesheet = true; to MediaWiki:Common.js so that it will recieve appropriate styling. AS you can see here, the template is in about the right spot but the hover tooltip is messed up. I think this should fix it. Don't forget to submit the page for review, so that Staff can approve the changes. Cheers, Patrik 13:21, November 7, 2018 (UTC)
Looks like they've accepted the JS change. Let me know if you're satisfied with the style or if you want any changes. Also, are you aware of any other templates like this one? Patrik 19:22, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

Hi can you block this [[8]] user? Has been replacing vital information on important pages with random phrases. SamtheHobbitoftheShire (talk) 08:02, November 11, 2018 (UTC)

Questionable articles

Would you take a look at these articles when you get a chance? Some, if not all of them, may deserve deletion or a rehaul. Just wanted to make sure they didn't get lost behind more recent edits. Thanks! --Bitterhand (talk) 17:40, November 12, 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, there's just no sense in having articles for non-unique things/animals, however well-written they may be. Also, I found this in a seemingly forgotten, duplicate category; it appears to need some updating but I'm not sure if there's a formal policy as of now. --Bitterhand (talk) 18:48, November 13, 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism of Isildur page

User 2601:182:4201:F9A0:4D5F:76D0:54D:B659 made many vandalizing edits to this page. I undid them. Please check it out. 

Xkcd1BeretGuy (talk) 08:42, November 13, 2018 (UTC)

Blocked

Hi HiddenVale, this is Bitterhand. Apparently I made a mistake when trying to revert the spam left on the "Hobbits" page yesterday, but somehow it shows that I replaced the spam. This was not my intention whatsoever, obviously, but DarkLantern blocked me without a warning and I have been unable to make any contact here, as I have no ability to edit anything. I left DarkLantern a message on the Fandom community site, but I'm afraid it didn't go through. This IP address, by the way, is an older device of mine that I used to contribute some years ago. If you could help or contact DarkLantern for me, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks! 68.113.85.254 22:39, November 19, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! That was indeed me from another device. --Bitterhand (talk) 03:55, November 20, 2018 (UTC)

Year template

I left a message here yesterday, but I'm afraid no one saw it since it didn't show up on the main activity log. Not sure how familiar you are with the relevant coding; but just wanted to let you know. --Bitterhand (talk) 18:57, November 24, 2018 (UTC)

Great! I see what you mean there with the grammar error, but otherwise everything looks like it's been corrected. I'll take a look at the code, but I won't change anything unless I can definitively find the error. Also, would you delete the redirect SR 1540 as long as we're fixing the date system? I'm not sure why it's redirecting to SR 1541. --Bitterhand (talk) 04:02, November 26, 2018 (UTC)

Beware this user: Adding non-canon characters

Hi HiddenVale.   Be aware a user with IP Special:Contributions/118.200.127.74 may add non-characters.  I've already undid his/her edit to the Dunedain page.  Xkcd1BeretGuy (talk) 08:42, November 27, 2018 (UTC)

Notice

Hey, just letting you know that my bot recently performed some cleanup:

  • {{Template: to {{
  • Image to File
  • <br> to <br/>

Cheers, Patrik 17:37, November 27, 2018 (UTC)

FO/SR corrections

I believe I have finished correcting all of the Fourth Age and corresponding Shire Reckoning year pages; there was a major misalignment due to the incorrect coding in the year template that we fixed. Would you delete all of the SR and FO year articles in LOTR:Articles for deletion? I think that's all that needs to be done to finish the realignment. --Bitterhand (talk) 19:28, November 28, 2018 (UTC)

Vandal

Hi I caught this IP turning species into spec on Great Spiders. Isn’t a very serious offence but must be watched. SamtheHobbitoftheShire (talk) 17:16, November 29, 2018 (UTC)

New page

Hi there’s a new page on the wiki called The Lord of the Rings Book 1. Is it useful? I added links but could not find any categories it could belong to. SamtheHobbitoftheShire (talk) 09:33, December 2, 2018 (UTC)

Couple of things

When you get a chance, would you delete the year pages and redirects in Articles for deletion? Someone had made up birthdates for several of the dwarves from Thorin's company.

Also, per my discussion with Xkcd1BeretGuy at here and here, what would you consider the preferable option for immortals (elves) for whom no death is recorded? I haven't heard back from him since my response, so I'm not sure what his thoughts are on what I hope I've accurately interpreted as our unofficial policy.

And no problem in response to your last message. I'm glad we were able to get that straightened out with relatively little trouble! Thanks, --Bitterhand (talk) 00:11, December 9, 2018 (UTC)

Also, I meant to add that the links to the Czech and Latin Tolkien wikis located at the bottom of the recent changes page are evidently out of date, as the sites still exist. I'm not sure if they were renamed or moved, but I don't think I have permission to fix that. Just wanted to bring to your attention. --Bitterhand (talk) 00:21, December 9, 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure how the page appears in your browser, but on mine the language links appear at the very bottom after the heading "Languages:", and in the top right corner of the page under the small drop-down menu. It's this: [10] page, in case that was unclear. --Bitterhand (talk) 20:08, December 10, 2018 (UTC)

Just wanted to note that the Nerdanel article has her listed as "still alive", but is evidently admin-protected, so I am unable to edit it. I've corrected said problem for the rest of the High Elves. --Bitterhand (talk) 03:05, December 11, 2018 (UTC)

Templates

Hello, per this conversation, I've updated a few templates to use the EraIcon script that you imported earlier for {{Real}}. I have a few questions though...

  • Can we combine {{Featured star}} and {{Lotr featured}}? They do exactly the same thing.
  • Can we get rid of {{Icons}} and {{Icons/SubIcon}}? Both are unused and do the same thing as other templates.
  • Could we possibly remove the various protection icons templates and instead import ProtectionIcons? I'm fine if you don't want to, but it does have several advantages.
    • Automatically updates.
    • No need to add the template—the icons get added automatically.
    • Supports all types of protection.
    • Has a more modern look than the current templates.

Thanks, Patrik 18:44, December 11, 2018 (UTC)

Excellent. I'm rather busy right now, but in a few days I can work on this more. In the meantime, could you add dev:ProtectionIcons.js to MediaWiki:ImportJS, which will import the script? Thanks and Merry Christmas! Patrik 20:31, December 15, 2018 (UTC)
Great! Now, could you remove {{Fully-protected}} and {{Fully-protected/Alternative}} from the pages where they are used and then delete them? I can take care of the semi-protected one and will mark it for deletion. Also, which of the featured templates would you like to keep? Having both doesn't seem very practical. Patrik 15:40, December 26, 2018 (UTC)

Misc. questions

Do you know how to hide {{{image}}} and {{{caption}}} in the conflict infobox, as seen here?

Also, do you know where the source for the information here might be found? Obviously Minas Ithil was retaken by Isildur and/or Anarion following or during the War of the Last Alliance, since we know the Nazgul captured the city in TA 2002, but I can't find any mention of the events described in the article in either the Appendices or in the Silmarillion.

Additionally, please delete FO 68 and FO 73 when you get a chance. The dates listed there are made-up.

Thanks, and Merry Christmas! --Bitterhand (talk) 21:26, December 19, 2018 (UTC)

Categories

I've recently noticed there are duplicate categories for a couple of topics: [11] and [12] as well as [13] and [14]. Would you decide which of each is preferable and delete the other? I will go through and transfer the images from the deleted categories into the remaining ones. Additionally, [15] should be deleted since the category name should reflect the non-canonical nature of the articles there, and [16] because of a misspelling. Thanks, --Bitterhand (talk) 23:37, December 26, 2018 (UTC)

Categories and merging suggestions

I have emptied the "Hobbit images" ([17]) category into "Images of hobbits", so that can be deleted now.

When you get a chance, would you look at merging Battle in Dale with Siege of Dale, as well as Daggers of Westernesse with Barrow-blades? I have mentioned them in AtbM.

Also, what do you think about merging Mithril Gate of Minas Tirith into Great Gate of Minas Tirith? The gate itself didn't change; it was simply rebuilt with a different material later on.

Let me know if you have any questions. Have a good evening, --Bitterhand (talk) 03:29, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

RE: Save time

Alright, I will bear that in mind in the future. Patrik 22:46, January 10, 2019 (UTC)

Obsolete pages

When you get a chance, would you delete this category ([18]), as well as Battle in Dale, Daisy Gamgee, and Template:Semi-protected? They may have come up before, but got lost behind other edits.

You'll recall I mentioned merging "Battle in Dale" with "Siege of Dale", but afterwards I noticed all that was required to do that was to move the picture from the former to the latter. Thus, the merge is complete and "Battle in Dale" can be deleted. Additionally, the Daisy Gamgee article needs to be deleted so Daisy Gamgee I can be renamed; there's no reason for the suffix since her younger relative was Daisy Gardner, not Gamgee.

Thanks, --Bitterhand (talk) 17:38, January 22, 2019 (UTC)

Nargil pass

I noticed you reverted the "Non-canonical Mordor locations" category back to "Mordor" on the Nargil pass article, and was just wondering if I missed something since the location is, as far as I know, non-canonical. No pressure, just wanted to be sure I was correctly categorizing things. Good afternoon, --Bitterhand (talk) 20:59, February 2, 2019 (UTC)

Good, glad to know I'm not going crazy. ;) Have a good day, --Bitterhand (talk) 16:47, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

Questionable user

Just a heads-up that user Twenty2one1pilots has been replacing/adding dates and switching some from SR to TA without justification. I haven't closely examined every edit, but at least some of them are wrong, and none of them necessary. Thanks, and have a good evening. --Bitterhand (talk) 23:53, February 11, 2019 (UTC)

Question

As we know, many pages need revisions; but how do I know what to revise in order to make the page abide by wikis policies?

(Melon1234 (talk) 22:48, February 12, 2019 (UTC))

Edit war

Just a note that User:Yechezkelb and User:LonelyHorse9 have been reverting each other's edits at Barad-dûr, with different main images. Personally I would lean towards the original image since it more accurately reflects what we know for sure from the books, and not Peter Jackson's imagining of it, but in any case we need to put an end to the back-and-forth. --Bitterhand (talk) 19:27, February 15, 2019 (UTC)

Eltariel Article

The Eltariel Article is void and against anything Tolkien, My Friend who is dead now, would not have liked it is not in any of his books and is invalid information please, take it off or delete it. John Ronald Reuel Tolkien would not like anything he did not create to reach the internet and I believe that he is probably seeing this in heaven and shaking his head in disappointment.

Sincerely, 

Paul L. Hale

New Editor 

@Fingolfin High King of the Noldor 18:10, February 22, 2019 (UTC)

New categories

Just in case you didn't notice, FingolfinKing created the new categories [19], [20],and [21] earlier today, as well as the oddly titled "Lords of the Universe" ([22]). A couple of these seem legitimate, but should probably be renamed without the hyphens. The usefulness of this user's other actions/opinions are obvious enough, as you noted. Have a good evening, --Bitterhand (talk) 03:34, February 23, 2019 (UTC)

The Taming of Sméagol

Would you delete The Taming Of Smeagol and The Taming of Smeagol? Somehow there got to be multiple pages and redirects; I have arranged them such that the best article is now correctly titled, but the others are left over. --Bitterhand (talk) 21:27, February 23, 2019 (UTC)

Fantasy Movies Footer

sorry if this question seems weird, but would you like this wiki to be included in FANDOM's Fantasy Movies Footer?

Wazzupguys (talk) 19:50, February 24, 2019 (UTC)

How to find new fantasy franchises to get into

Hello HiddenVale,

I am currently doing a study on the challenges fantasy fans face in finding the next fantasy franchise they would like to get into and where to get access to that content.

Given your role as an admin for the LoTR Wiki, I would be keen to interview you to get your thought on this. What would be the best way to do this and would you have some availability to connect on this over the coming weeks?

Best,

Fantasynexus2019 (talk) 21:57, February 25, 2019 (UTC)

Duplicate image categories

I just noticed there are two image categories for Uruk-hai: [23] and [24]. Might we delete the latter? I can help with moving those images to the correctly named one. Have a good evening, --Bitterhand (talk) 02:20, March 1, 2019 (UTC)

No problem. By the way, just for future reference, should the message that User:Ezradexter1027 left on my talk page be considered spam (e.g. something I shouldn't reply to) or is that technically allowed? Thanks, --Bitterhand (talk) 03:06, March 2, 2019 (UTC)

[25] is now empty; all images have been moved to the correct category. --Bitterhand (talk) 23:38, March 2, 2019 (UTC)

On Old Wallpaper image

I'm very sorry but I don't have it or know what happen to it.--DarkLantern (talk) 00:39, March 3, 2019 (UTC)

Background image

I don't guess this was it, was it? If not, I might be able to find a way to appropriately format it so that it could be used. And by the way, I agree that it was a fantastic background image. --Bitterhand (talk) 01:00, March 3, 2019 (UTC)

Roturn King-Minas Tirith

In regard to the above; do you know if the background image need to be pre-formatted (as you can see the black space in the center if you zoom out in the web browser), or does that happen automatically? I was wondering because I think the above image is the same one we liked, but if changes need to be made I can try to edit it accordingly. No rush, and have a good evening, --Bitterhand (talk) 02:49, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

RE: "We have work to do"

Sorry, I must have sent my last message before you finished typing yours. But yes, I'm excited to get started on that! The soundtrack business has bothered me for some time now, but I've put off bringing it up since it seems such a gigantic project. In any case, it's long overdue, and I'll definitely focus on fixing those categories along with the Cast & Crew categories you mentioned. I do wish I were able to delete the obsolete categories without bothering you every time it comes up, though.

I do have one question, as a matter of fact. As you mentioned, there are an increasing amount of non-Peter Jackson films/productions, so should we go ahead and change the "Peter Jackson's films or other media" line in the character infoboxes to something more inclusive? I can help with making those changes if you believe that is appropriate.

Thanks for the information and the heads-up; I'm looking forward to all this new content! --Bitterhand (talk) 01:36, March 3, 2019 (UTC)

Re: Redlinks

My apologies, I thought that was an article we had deleted previously. It's been a traumatic week, but I'll definitely keep a closer eye on that in the future. --Bitterhand (talk) 20:42, March 10, 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good. By the way, I noticed that Middle-earth is spelled "Middle-Earth" on one of the Template:MainPage Polls. Could you correct that, as it's admin-locked? --Bitterhand (talk) 20:47, March 10, 2019 (UTC)

Alternatively, we could update the video game poll to include Middle-earth: Shadow of War, since it isn't listed. --Bitterhand (talk) 20:48, March 10, 2019 (UTC)

Ah, that's unfortunate; I wasn't aware that was the case. Let me know if I can help at all with that. --Bitterhand (talk) 20:52, March 10, 2019 (UTC)

Redirect

When you get a chance, would you delete the redirect Mirror of Galadriel, so the corresponding page can be renamed? Not sure how that happened. Have a good evening, --Bitterhand (talk) 03:10, March 11, 2019 (UTC)

Categories and featured system

I believe the issue you mentioned with the "Soundtracks" category is corrected now; I have relisted all of the Complete Recordings tracks into a new category. Additionally, I updated the descriptions for several related categories so that new content (e.g. the biopic) can be placed there.

I also wanted to bring up the matter of our "Featured article" system, which has several facets. I took the liberty of building a "Featured articles" category into the Featured star template, so that we can more easily keep track of which articles are currently featured. However, the F/ templates that rotate on the Main Page don't quite line up with the actual featured articles, and there are two F/ templates for Sting (Template:F/32 and Template:F/7). All this is listed at LOTR:Featured article.

My suggestion is this: Since it's been years (or over a decade in some cases) since these articles were chosen, we should make a new list of featured articles and have 31 F/ templates which correspond to them. The list need not be radically different from what we already have, but there are at least several articles which I believe can be substituted for more popular or relevant topics.

If this sounds agreeable, I'll be happy to do the work. I think it would help give the wiki a bit of a refresh, since there's a lot of Middle-earth related news going on recently. Thanks, and have a good evening, --Bitterhand (talk) 21:58, March 12, 2019 (UTC)

I had made a list of likely featured article candidates, so I'll share it:

Aragorn, Arwen, Bilbo, Boromir, Celebrimbor, Elrond, Elves, Frodo, Galadriel, Gandalf, Gimli, Gollum, Gondor, J.R.R. Tolkien, Legolas, Melkor, Merry, Middle-earth, Mithril, Mordor, Nazgul, Numenor, One Ring, Peregrin, Samwise, Sauron, Second Age, Smaug, Sting, The Lord of the Rings, Witch-king

In particular, Melkor as it has become our week-to-week most-viewed article. I was also interested to see how much Second Age and Numenor increased in viewership with Amazon's announcement a few days ago, so I think those would make sense as well. Obviously these are all up for discussion, but just wanted to share my thoughts. Thanks! --Bitterhand (talk) 02:24, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Well that does makes sense; hadn't thought of that before. Let me know if there are any other ways in particular I can help out. --Bitterhand (talk) 12:12, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Couple of things

I just stumbled across this picture: [26] recently, and thought you might be interested to see it. Perhaps Darkchylde might know something about where the old image went?

I also found this page: [27], and there looks to be a ton of categories that can be deleted.

Additionally, do you think Men of Arnor deserves to be merged into Dúnedain of Arnor? I guess there may have been men in Arnor who weren't Dúnedain, but that article seems to only be referring to the Dúnedain.

Have a good evening, --Bitterhand (talk) 02:52, March 20, 2019 (UTC)


Hi, I´m on this wiki for the first time because I´m rereading LOTR and wanted to check quickly when the Hobbits spotted Gollum the first time.

While reading up on Gollum, I noticed a small mistake.

It says on the Gollum Wiki https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/Gollum under the chapter of "The War of the Ring" that "Frodo tied an Elven Rope around Gollum's neck for a leash, but the mere touch of the rope pained him."

In the book, on page 806 you can see that Sam first wanted to tie a noose for Gollum and hang him after he tried to bolt off.

"Your rope might prove useful again, Sam," he said. Sam got out the rope. "And where were you off to in the cold hard lands, Mr. Gollum?" he growled. "We wonders, aye, we wonders. to find some of your orc-friends, I warrant. You nasty treacherous creature It´s round your neck this rope ought to go, and a tight noose too."

The hobbits then decided to bind a leash around his ankle and keep control over him that way.

"All we need is something to keep a hold on him," said Frodo. "We want him to walk, so it´s no good tying his legs - or his arms, he seems to use them nearly as much. Tie one end to his ankle, and keep a grip on the other end."

Frodo stands on Gollum while Sam ties the knot (very loosely, as Frodo states) around Gollums ankle and the second he is done Gollum freaks out over the knot hurting him so much because it is made by elves.

Just thought I´ll give you a little information I found, as I said, I´m here for the first time so I don´t know if this is the right place to put it.

Thanks for your cool work and all the best to you.

Sweetyman (talk) 20:16, March 20, 2019 (UTC)Stefan
Gollum1234

LOTRO

Also, I've been thinking about the applicability of LotRO content here for a while now. By definition, of course, any location/character/significant object from the game can belong here as an article. But as you can see here: [28], there are over 86,000 content articles at the Lotro Wiki, and there's no reason for us to have near-duplicate articles for each item, nor would it be feasible. Do you think there's some kind of parameters we could set for LotRO content here for the sake of organization? Obviously depictions of canon material belongs, but perhaps also major locations and characters that directly tie in to the main quests? Just some thoughts.

Have a good evening, --Bitterhand (talk) 03:07, March 26, 2019 (UTC)

Congrats

Hey, Congrats on joining Council! :) Patrik 16:26, March 26, 2019 (UTC)

Re:

Oh ok sorry by the way......Darksoldier1187 (talk) 09:33, March 30, 2019 (UTC)

why you removed the siblings part of berelach?

for gods sake the realm is GONDOR isn't it?

oh ok but i thought it was important to fill the entries that we surely know (they are actually unknown but ok)


Wiki Manager

Hi! My name is Playsonic2, and I’m the Fandom Wiki Manager for The Lord of the Rings Wiki. I am here to help the community and be a liaison to full-time Fandom staff. If you ever have a question or issue relating to the wiki, editing, etc., please contact me on my talk page. See you! ~Playsonic2 14:33, May 20, 2019 (UTC)

Community Manager

Hi HiddenVale, how are you?

Well, as you may have noticed with the new change of our Community Org, our team will be highly focused on building a closer relationships with our communities, admins and users than before. As one of the Community Managers, I will be together with our Wiki Manager Playsonic2 to fully support this wiki, help you and other admins solve any issues/concerns on this wiki, partnership with you guys for any exciting relevant projects, and make this wiki more attractive and successful.

I have seen his introduction here so I wanted to do it too adding more information for you :D

Long in short - we are here to fully support any needs you may have to make this community keep growing successfully. If you and other admins need any help, feel free to directly contact Playsonic2 or me any time. We will be always in touch!

And now? I would like to know more about the community, if you have any important request for us, any concern or what are your expectations for the new TV series.

Let's keep in touch!--Antonio R. Castro (leave me a message) @fandom 11:41, June 5, 2019 (UTC)

Re: Categories

Of course! I'll continue to work on overall cohesiveness as I'm able. I'll likely scale back my edit volume for the next couple of weeks while I finish a class, but it shouldn't be anything drastic.

You may want to delete this: ([29]) category that I made before realizing you had already made one titled simply "Images of Wights". Also, though it's obviously low on the proverbial priorities list, I've marked quite a few superfluous and duplicate images for deletion ([30]), which might help to clear up some disorganization.

Additionally, what do you think about deleting the articles here and possibly making a page listing the titles instead: ([31])? Personally I don't see much point in having a separate article for each scene, and we'd eventually have to add scenes for the previous two films to be consistent.

Thanks, --Bitterhand (talk) 17:48, June 5, 2019 (UTC)

why was Golasgil's info and picture changed??? Darksoldier1187 (talk) 12:36, June 6, 2019 (UTC)

yeah but the pictures from the movie were removed as well as the portrayal adaptation

Gillim category

Is there any mention in the Book of Lost Tales of Gilim having any allegiance to Morgoth? I don't have that book but I have the re-edited version of Beren and Luthien and Gilim is briefly mentioned there, but there is nothing to indicate that he is in league with Morgoth Bauglir.This is where I found him mentioned: "nor did she forget the chain Angainu that Aulë and Tulkas made or the neck of Gilim the giant". Giants were indead dangerous creatures, but there is no recorded version of them being allied with either one of the Dark Powers, as far as I know. I read the Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales but I found no mention of Giants serving evil overlords. Sure, they are used by the Goblin faction in BFME2 and the Angmar faction in the expansion pack ROTWK, but that's non-canon. So is Gilim ever counted by J.R.R. Tolkien himself or by his son Christopher among the servants/allies of Morgoth?Alex of Star Wars (talk) 12:15, June 9, 2019 (UTC)

Discussion board

Hello Hiddenvale,

I was just wondering if you could enable discussion on the LOTR wiki? I will be really grateful and believe me we would really have a good number of users using the Dboard. So pls let me know if that's possible.

Newt Strike (talk) 11:08, June 22, 2019 (UTC)

Hey HiddenVale, I saw your question on Slack and that you had requested Discussions be enabled. To speed things up a bit I went ahead and enabled it. You can find it now on https://lotr.fandom.com/. - Brandon Rhea@fandom(talk) 00:48, June 23, 2019 (UTC)
Oh. Splendid, thank you! HiddenVale - HV logo TalkPage 00:51, June 23, 2019 (UTC)
No problem! - Brandon Rhea@fandom(talk) 00:52, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


Hey Hiddenvale,

I would also like to propose myself for moderatorship on the Dboard. I have experience with discussion rules n guidelines and I'm already moderating like three wikis. So it will be good if you grant my request. And thanks for enabling the discussion. Any idea why it has not popped in the fandom app yet?

Newt Strike (talk) 06:29, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

Ah it's okay. I understand I'm new here but not new to moderatorship. But anyways, hope you will grant my request in the upcoming days. I will be contributing to discussion and try to attract users there. And I guess, the staffs can enable the discussion on apps too, right? May be you could ask them for it. Thanks

Newt Strike (talk)`

NVM, discussion has been enabled on app as well.

Newt Strike (talk) 08:35, June 24, 2019 (UTC)

RE: Update

Great! I think that has a lot of potential to be a positive component of the wiki, and I'll certainly be active there. If you feel the need for one, I'll be happy to be a discussion moderator to help enforce the rules.

It might be prudent to add some additional rules depending on how it goes, but we'll have to play it by ear, obviously.

Thanks, and have a great evening!

--Bitterhand (talk) 01:51, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

Just wanted to get your opinion on some potential discussion rules (this came around faster than I anticipated). Could/should we ban quasi-irrelevant posts (currently those asking for favorite characters)? They're harmless, I suppose, but in one sense lower the general quality of material here. At the same time, I don't want to be legalistic with other users, but my impression is that it detracts from our purpose of being a serious Tolkien-centered encyclopedia and pulls more towards a fan-fic realm. (I've watched the Wookiepedia discussions go from a rather impressive center of news and analysis to a steady stream of memes, "who's the most powerful" polls and silly questions, and would prefer we avoid the same if possible.)

Or perhaps I'm overreacting; maybe that's just what the discussions are intended to be. But in any case just wanted to get your take before I added anything to the guidelines.

Thanks, and have a good evening.

--Bitterhand (talk) 01:24, June 26, 2019 (UTC)

I went ahead and updated the guidelines over on Discussions per what we talked about; obviously, feel free to amend what I added if needed. I'll be on the lookout for other types of posts that deserve to be listed, but I think that should do for now.

--Bitterhand (talk) 03:11, June 26, 2019 (UTC)

RE: Communication

Sounds good; I’m about to turn in for the night, so I’ll email you as soon as I get a chance tomorrow. Thanks!

--Bitterhand (talk) 03:00, June 28, 2019 (UTC)

Updated Guidelines

Hey Hiddenvale, I'm here just to let you guys know that the discussion has been enabled just right now. We don't even have enough contributors there so don't you guys think it's too early to set up strict guidelines right now? It's just the beginning of the Dboard and I can see more deleted posts than any discussion post. I'm not saying you guys are wrong but there are different types of users, some like to post memes, some have poll interests while some like to have in-depth discussion so I guess as the discussion has just began right now we should allow all types of contributions. Also, wookepedia got a revival cuz there were more number of deleted posts than the discussion posts and that's why the staffs took that measure. It's just a thought, let me know what you think of it.

Newt Strike (talk) 07:18, June 28, 2019 (UTC)Yes

Hello I'm Ran Fa Li 132 I'm in LOTR wikia... I'd like to apply for mod.. Consider this when there is a need for mods.. As bitter hand is the only mod there

Ran Fa Li 132 (talk) 14:29, June 29, 2019 (UTC)

And u asked how i came across this That's very simple I have been following this LOTR wikia for ages.. And I'm new to editing Started in HPW some time ago.. Newt strike the new GDM told me that the Dboard for LOTR is available now.. Thx for him..

Ran Fa Li 132 (talk) 14:31, June 29, 2019 (UTC)

Discussions

It just occurred to me that the line between "who is better" posts (not allowed) and "who's your favorite" (currently allowed) posts in Discussions can actually be quite fine, as seen in the poll titled "Saruman or Sauron". What do you think the best solution might be? Personally, if I were the dictator of my own message board, I'd probably ban both, but I don't believe that's likely to be best here.

--Bitterhand (talk) 02:25, July 2, 2019 (UTC)

Weapons

What do you think about deleting Legolas' Mirkwood bow, Gimli's battle axe, and Sam's Barrow-blade, for the same reason we don't have articles for "Faramir's sword"? Each are only mentioned a couple of times in The Fellowship of the Ring, and are not capitalized. I'm not sure if Gimli's Walking Axe should stay or not based on it being nominally unique to the films.

Also, do you have any objections if I start merging the articles here, or would some of these need more deliberation? It only occurred to me recently that non-admins can merge articles by redirecting/moving text if needed.

Thanks,

--Bitterhand (talk) 17:14, July 8, 2019 (UTC)

Organization

Just wanted to mention a couple of things that may not be high on the priorities list, but might merit a look.

Firstly, the "Forum" link on the dropdown from "Other" now directs to the new Discussion board, instead of the older Forum:Index. If there's anywhere that links to the old forum, I'm not aware of it. I wonder if there is any need now for the "Fellowship" forum, as it appears to serve the same purpose as the new Discussions, and it seems unlikely anyone will find/use it at this point. Depending on how we want to use the Discussions, I think we could potentially direct users to the Council for troubleshooting/wiki-based issues from the actual Discussions or clarify that Discussions is available for all questions.

Also, I believe we briefly discussed this a while back, but what do you think the process might should be for selecting new featured articles/pictures? I think it'd be beneficial to update our current selection sometime in the near future and establish a methodology for periodically updating as needed after that, and I'll be happy to help with it however the best way ends up being.

Thanks,

--Bitterhand (talk) 16:11, July 12, 2019 (UTC)

In most of the other wikis I've looked at, there appears to be a simple nomination/vote system, and the admin will then implement the winners. Wookiepedia, I'm sure due to its massive size and traffic, has a separate group of admin just to maintain the featured article system, and meets monthly to update it. Obviously there's no need for us to change the articles that frequently, and considering the number of nominations to the featured picture article, I'd propose something along the lines of this:

Leave a place open (or start a Discussion thread) for users to nominate articles if they wish, but primarily work off of joint admin analysis, with a tentative plan to review the current articles every six months or so. If it's you and I and/or the other admin, I imagine we could make do with simple agreement/discussion in lieu of straight-up voting. And if any major developments come out (Amazon series content, for instance) between periods, I'd assume that would be a valid impetus to add/subtract a few current articles as needed.

Anyway, those are just my thoughts; feel free to let me know if I can help with anything.

--Bitterhand (talk) 02:02, July 13, 2019 (UTC)



Cleanup

I went ahead and created new portals for the scenes from the Lord of the Rings film trilogy, so if all is done correctly I suppose we can delete the separate scene articles we discussed previously. And by the way, shouldn't the above link be titled "The Lord of the Rings film trilogy"? It appears that the current page was created by Mayooresan; a mistake seems likely given the grammar at their page. If so, I can move the info back to the original title, which is now a redirect.

Also, I just noticed that the "Forum" link to the right side of Recent Activity, in the "Community Messages" box, still directs to the deleted Forum:Index.

Have a good afternoon,

--Bitterhand (talk) 17:51, July 29, 2019 (UTC)

Saving

Hi HiddenVale, Thank you for the welcome note you gave me! I had a question. Is there any way to save a page that you are creating without publishing it so you can come back to work on it later? Hannon allen and God bless! -ArwenUdomiel (talk) 19:31, August 1, 2019 (UTC)

OK! Thank you! I will do that!ArwenUdomiel (talk) 23:23, August 1, 2019 (UTC)

RE: New template and LOTR categories

I actually had in mind just what you mentioned with regard to clarification, specifically site visitors less familiar with Middle-earth; I guess I was more in the mindset of being organizationally accurate than of common sense. I certainly don't have a problem with leaving the template off those articles, so of course feel free to delete it.

Also, I meant to mention earlier that I don't see much point in having both of these categories: [32] and [33], since the latter will by definition include all the articles in the former. I think the major/minor character distinction is good, but having two categories that largely overlap doesn't seem to be of much help. Would one of those be a legitimate candidate for deletion?

Have a good evening, and sorry about any trouble.

--Bitterhand (talk) 01:33, August 4, 2019 (UTC)

As an appendix to the above question, what would you say constitutes a character being in that category; would a single mention or appearance sort that character into "Minor", and longer appearances into "Major"?

Also, as a brief note, do you think we can/should disallow "Who's your favorite" polls at this point in regard to the Discussions, or hold off for now? They really don't foster any discussion, and I think technically the Guidelines would be more consistent to exclude them, although they have made up the majority of the posts there so far.

Have a good evening,

--Bitterhand (talk) 00:35, August 7, 2019 (UTC)

Hey HiddenVale

LonelyHorse9 (talk) 02:36, August 29, 2019 (UTC)

https://ardapedia.fandom.com/wiki/King_Rellton

why you be mean to me?

you insulted my creation

LonelyHorse9 (talk) 02:45, August 29, 2019 (UTC)

Twitter page

Hi, HiddenVale. I recently realized that I haven't taken care of the LotR wiki's Twitter page in a while. I'm sorry about that. I really should have kept it up, especially since I said I would. I've been occupied with a lot of stuff in the real world among other things. If you'd like, though, I can pick it up again, and make a post every week.

18:00, August 30, 2019 (UTC)

Infobox and discussions

I noticed when updating the articles for the three books of the trilogy that Infobox Book wasn't behaving properly when leaving fields blank; I took a look at it and was able to fix it, as well as update it to the new markup formatting (Draft). Just wanted to run it by you before I approved it to replace the old template as I'm not sure how difficult it is to revert.

Also, hopefully it won't be an issue, but the user you blocked earlier today left some spam in the discussions early this morning; I deleted the offending posts, but I'm not sure if blocking users from the wiki also blocks them from commenting there. I evidently don't have the option to ban people simply as a moderator, or I would have done it myself.

Have a good afternoon,

--Bitterhand (talk) 19:59, September 17, 2019 (UTC)

Letters

I am going to start writing a summary of the letters in my own words. Not copied from any website and not a full version of the letter. I will probably start this tommorow.

Directional articles

Do you think that the "directional" articles (i.e. North, Northeast, Southeast, etc.) would be candidates for deletion? Seems pretty self-explanatory to me. Also, just a reference to the above message about the book infobox in case you missed it.

Have a great day,

--Bitterhand (talk) 17:45, October 1, 2019 (UTC)

Deleting a page?

Hello HiddenVale, I think that someone just wrote a page called Why Samwise Gamgee is the Real Hero of Middle-Earth. I'm not sure if that is a proper subject for a page. Would it be a candidate for deletion? Na lû e-govaded 'wîn, ArwenUdomiel (talk) 21:43, October 7, 2019 (UTC)

added message

On Deleted article

Remember Glaurung's attack on Beleriand or Glaurung's attack on the Beleriand. I've agreed with most of your deletions so far but I believe you should have at least consulted me on this one article. It is not just because I wrote it and want it to be preserved just for that reason alone, it is because I believe it to be a legitimate in-universe historical battle or event. I may not be mentioned by name but it is fully described in the Quenta Silmarillion as a part of the Noldor's war with Melkor, the life and history of the villain Glaurung, the Siege of Angband, and the long peace before the Dagor Bragollach. If not by named article, then much of the text alone is valid and worthy to be added to the Glaurung article. It is for this reason that I may revive it. I'd like for us to work something out on this as two admins who can both delete or un-delete things here.--DarkLantern (talk) 06:10, October 11, 2019 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.