Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Middle-earth/archive9

message: Tolkien articles by quality statistics (worklist) :
Archives
----
*Archive 1 (25 Nov., 2005 – 02 Apr., 2006)
*Archive 2 (05 Apr., 2006 – 15 May, 2006)
*Archive 3 (15 May, 2006 – 30 June, 2006)
*Archive 4 (1 July, 2006 – 17 Aug., 2006)
*Archive 5 (23 Aug., 2006 – 29 Sept., 2006)
*Archive 6 (30 Sept., 2006 – 7 Dec., 2006)
*Archive 7 (8 Dec., 2006 – 21 Feb., 2007)
*Archive 8 (22 Feb., 2006 – 24 April, 2007)
----
If anyone wants to pull out or copy a previous discussion, feel free to to do so. —Mirlen 17:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

message: ===Roll call: April - June===
Sorry for the delay in updating the project talk page (again!). Please sign your name below and on the front page. Comments are optional.
#May not be able to contribute for a while in the future... Uthanc 16:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Community

message: Sorry for the delay in updating the project talk page (again!). Please sign your name below and on the front page. Comments are optional.
#May not be able to contribute for a while in the future... Uthanc 16:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Roll call: April - June

message: Several images on pages which fall under the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth have been flagged for deletion because no fair use rationale given.  These images are all screenshots from the The_Lord_of_the_Rings_film_trilogy and already contain the Template:Non-free_film_screenshot but still need fair use rationale, source, and copyright information.  Is there any way to generate a list of images under our WikiProject that have been flagged so that the appropriate free use rationale can be added to each page before they are deleted?>^..^< Nimfaelin 12:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Images for Deletion

message: Carcharoth pointed out to me that the usage of the A-class is rather ambiguous. It's debatable on this WikiProject about whether GA is part of the B-A-FA sequence, which would normally (but not always) put A above GA as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Assessment, or whether GA is separate from it. As of right now, 9 articles are rated A-class in this WikiProject, usually just to distinguish them from B-class articles, and none of these are Good Articles. We really need to create a well-defined system for classifying these articles. I really don't know much about the inner workings of assessments, so I'll try to help, but I'm leaving the experts to nitpick about this issue. --queso man 00:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Correction: The Lord of the Rings film trilogy is a good article. --queso man 19:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I suggest improving those 9 articles (see here), or at least one of them, enough to make GA status, and then carrying on from there. Well, all except Middle-earth, as that is a former featured article, and we should really try to improve that enough to go straight back up (will take a lot of work though). Carcharoth 00:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-level assessment system 

message: Per  all maps for the middle earth entries have been deleted yesterday, and the CommonsDelinker removed them from the articles.
This seems to me to make a mockery of many of the articles which are relatively uninteresting if they cannot be seen in the context of middle Earth. 
It also makes me wonder why the text content of the articles is ok, as they are arguably derivative works too. 
I disagree that people should be able to delete images from commons that are referenced in WP, without first discussing it on the relevant talk pages.  Aaron Lawrence 12:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the articles seem uninteresting without the maps, then improve the writing! Not all articles are about the geography of Middle-earth, and images other than maps are possible. Carcharoth 01:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

text: If the maps could be used under fair use, leave me a message and I will temporarily undelete the maps. Bryan 06:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

text: It seems to be that there is a strange derivation between the image and text (article) fair use policy. I mean this is just clear -- people made maps of areas that the book's didn't even have maps of... and they are deleted because they derive from copyrighted works. I dunno -- all the articles that are only referenced by the material itself should all be delete now as well? That seems very extreme. I know that Wikimedia common's didn't have to tell the WikiProject about the deletion but its a very significant one and well worth talk about in this location especially. MrMacMan Talk  06:49, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, some people from the WikiProject (including me) did take part in the discussion. (See: Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Middle Earth maps) The Commons people and us should have advertised it here more widely, but mybe it was (I can't remember). One of the problems is that the discussion actually took place several months ago, but a technical problem meant it went un-noticed for about 6 months and was only closed recently. Also, things have been slow around here anyway I also believe User:Astrokey44 created the maps, and was the one that nominated them for deletion. If you want, you can try over there to see if they will allow the debate to be reopened. The map creator also pointed out they are now in use on the lotr wikia (see link at the debate). Carcharoth 09:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I took part in the discussion also, and posted a notice here months ago that the maps were likely to be deleted. In anticipation of that I copied them all locally and could thus re-upload them to Wikipedia under fair use guidelines if we want to go that route. Commons doesn't allow 'fair use' images, but Wikipedia does. Rather than having a map on every location page it might be better to link specific locations to a few regional pages with maps. Of course, we have also talked about making alot of the small location pages into lists - which would help to consolidate things and cut down on the number of 'fair use' images needed. --CBD 16:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: All map images deleted: Should all the ME articles go too?

message: ==== Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Middle-earth canon====
I figure that people here might want to chime in at this AfD. Tarc 19:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I've done a rewrite, and Tttom added some references. Let's see what happens. Carcharoth 11:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No consensus Uthanc 16:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Update: I found a mirror version of 'Middle-earth in popular culture', and after looking through it, I'm taking this to deletion review. There needs to be a longer discussion on this. I'll post a link here once I've started the review. Actually, first, I'm discussing with the closing admin and the original AfD voters.  Carcharoth 11:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that ME in popular culture should be looked at again. At least, I think that an encyclopedia article could certainly be written about it, without resorting to lists of "when Gandalf was mentioned in XYZ sitcom". Tolkien-based Warcraft III games should be looked at my someone with knowledge of these games; I cannot tell if the article is talking about fan-created stuff or actual notable games. The other articles were rubbish and should stay deleted. --Fang Aili talk 14:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Salvage Jenny Dolfen (PROD, see below) if you can... She's a published illustrator. Uthanc 15:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We should probably be careful about having too many people articles. I've got this in a subpage of my user pages, but I've never found the time to see whether it is worth salvaging or not. As for my views on ME in popular culture, see my comments here. I'm waiting for a response there before I go to deletion review. Carcharoth 16:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for deletion

message: I figure that people here might want to chime in at this AfD. Tarc 19:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I've done a rewrite, and Tttom added some references. Let's see what happens. Carcharoth 11:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No consensus Uthanc 16:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Middle-earth canon]]

message: Who remembers that song that Pippin sings for Denethor as Faramir is riding out to try to retake Osgiliath? Well, it's called The Edge of Night, and it's up for deletion. If any of you feel strongly about it's being kept, then it (or deleted), then it would be great if you could visit here: . Thanks, Bmrbarre 02:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[The Edge of Night (song)]] 

message: I was looking through the log here and noticed several recent deletions. What should be done about these, if anything? I think expired prods can be contested, but ones deleted via AfD will be more problematic. These are also a mixed bunch, some are rubbish articles, while some are worth saving, in my opinion. Carcharoth 09:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: I found a mirror version of 'Middle-earth in popular culture', and after looking through it, I'm taking this to deletion review. There needs to be a longer discussion on this. I'll post a link here once I've started the review. Actually, first, I'm discussing with the closing admin and the original AfD voters.  Carcharoth 11:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that ME in popular culture should be looked at again. At least, I think that an encyclopedia article could certainly be written about it, without resorting to lists of "when Gandalf was mentioned in XYZ sitcom". Tolkien-based Warcraft III games should be looked at my someone with knowledge of these games; I cannot tell if the article is talking about fan-created stuff or actual notable games. The other articles were rubbish and should stay deleted. --Fang Aili talk 14:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Salvage Jenny Dolfen (PROD, see below) if you can... She's a published illustrator. Uthanc 15:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We should probably be careful about having too many people articles. I've got this in a subpage of my user pages, but I've never found the time to see whether it is worth salvaging or not. As for my views on ME in popular culture, see my comments here. I'm waiting for a response there before I go to deletion review. Carcharoth 16:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent deletions

message: *Jenny Dolfen, some time ago Uthanc 16:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That was a WP:PROD deletion. You can object and have it restored immediately, if you like. --Fang Aili talk 02:23, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles already deleted

message: From last archive:
*An article to keep an eye on: The History of The Hobbit. Carcharoth 19:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should be merged w/ Fourth Age Uthanc 16:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles newly made/found

message: Any updates on these? Fixed-pitch graphics. Uthanc 16:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family templates 

message: Perhaps we should start working on listification. Uthanc 16:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lists versus individual articles 

message: It seems the general consensus is to use "Tolkien's [Middle-earth] legendarium". I suggest making "legendarium" link to Tolkien's legendarium. Just not "Middle-earth universe" or "fictional universe of Middle-earth". Uthanc 18:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or why not just "Middle-earth writings?" Uthanc 16:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology 

message: Due to recurring complaints:
*Talk:The_Lord_of_the_Rings/archive_03#In_universe_style
*Talk:The_Lord_of_the_Rings#In-universe_perspective
*Talk:The_Lord_of_the_Rings#synopsis_in_past_tense
*Talk:Arwen#Past_tense_used_in_fictional_articles 
...perhaps it would be better to give way to the general guidelines... or leave it to a vote. Uthanc 16:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Important issue  - will entail rewriting whatever way. Uthanc 15:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Present tense vs. past tense, and in-universe style

message: Snipped lots of stuff here that should really be resurrected from the archives and discussion restarted/concluded. Carcharoth 12:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lots of stuff in archives (from last archive)

message: #Since the list of participants at front needs to be updated, why not just have the signing-up/roll call here? (or there?)  
#I just made the roll calls bi-monthly; okay with everyone? We're not very active as a unit anyway right now. Uthanc 16:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Streamlining Wikiproject stuff

message: I wish we had more illustrations to balance film images - one thing Tolkien Gateway has over our articles. Uthanc 17:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Random things

message: I am petitioning to have this page altered to rmeove the restriction against using succession boxes for fictional characters. I think this group has an interest since several related pages for fictional characters are already using these boxes. Please Vote Here.--Dr who1975 18:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)#Infoboxes and succession boxes|Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)]]

message: Could one of you perhaps look at List of Hobbits - I've recently reverted some (obvious) vandalism, but I doubt all the information in there is correct - for instance, I've never heard of a hobbit called "Andwise "Andy" Roper"! Stephenb (Talk) 10:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He's Sam's uncle. Thanks for reverting the bogus stuff. Uthanc 11:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism?

message: I just had to bring it to attention to two WikiProjects. It's a vote about moving "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (film)" to "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King". Just click the link, note I'm a member of neither projects I brought this attention to. TheBlazikenMaster 01:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kept with (film) Uthanc 15:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is a vote going on right [[Talk:The_Lord_of_the_Rings:_The_Return_of_the_King_(film)#Vote_for_movement.|here]]. 

message: I would suggest you to use  this pic (:Image:The one ring animated.gif) as wikiproyect logo --Andersmusician $ 02:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, any representation of the One Ring is perforce a Derivative work of Tolkien's stories and can therefor only be used under fair-use guidelines... and Wikipedia does not allow fair-use images to be used in templates. --CBD 13:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ergo it should only be linked from here (which I've done), and the license should be changed to give a fair-use rationale (which I haven't done). Carcharoth 14:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  new logo proposal 

message: From http://www.john-howe.com/forum/smf/index.php?topic=1910.0 - the man speaks: 
To put it in a nutshell, there are four conditions for use of any of my imagery on a web site (not including of course photos by other persons; in that case their permission must be requested).
#That the use be strictly non-commercial.
#That the work be properly credited.
#That a clear link to www.john-howe.com be provided.
#Last but not least, that the use of the image be in accordance with the image itself. This is perhaps hard to make clear, but I would refuse, for example, use of one of my pictures to promote ideas, concepts or undertakings with which I disagree, or for which the image's prime purpose is only to attract attention to something entirely different.
Obviously, I can neither control nor actually stop anyone from using what imagery of mine they decide to use on a site, but as I am generally dealing with people who appreciate the illustrations, I have run into few problems. (Most of the more amusing ones have been honest enough site owners who were "sold" my imagery by someone less scrupulous, rather like the Brooklyn Bridge...)
So can we use his images? Uthanc 17:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For those who didn't see TCC's response on Uthanc's talk page: Unfortunately because the "strictly non-commercial" license is not "free", we can't use the images per Wikipedia's Non-free policy. --Hyarion 23:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apologies for not updating this myself. Hyarion's Tolkien Gateway can, however, since it doesn't have such a policy (not bashing them). Sigh. Uthanc 00:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[John Howe]]'s image policy 

message: I thought I'd ask here before reverting the edits of User:Amsmith0903 who I'm guessing is the owner of Tolkien-Online.com, the links don't seem to say anything that the Wikipedia article doesn't already cover. Anyone oppose? --Hyarion 06:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link patrol 

message: Hi! I'm a member of the wiki Italian project dedicated to Tolkien. Some days ago we've done the complete familytree of the House of Anárion (spread into two parts, here and here); the template familytree hasn't been translated, so you can also use it on your wiki... there are some links that are different, but they can be corrected in a few minutes (and some words: figlio=son, figlia=daughter figlie=daughters continua=continues Re=King etc.). I guess it'd be useful for you ;) Xander --82.88.213.144 13:42, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  anarion house 

message: *There are two Beregonds, one described in Beregond (Middle-earth) and the other in Beregond. But they both lived on Middle Earth. The current above suggestion is "Beregond → Beregond (Steward); Beregond (Middle-earth) → Beregond. But I would suggest Beregond (Middle-earth) → Beregond (palace guard), and let plain Beregond be a disambig page. Anthony Appleyard 08:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The main Boromir article is about the guy who got shot by arrows. There are other Boromirs but that guy is much more prominent. Same goes for Beregond (Middle-earth). I say he should go to Beregond (for as we know, he's quite significant/prominent in the original RotK, together w/ son Bergil) Uthanc 13:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Article was moved. Carcharoth 09:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Beregond

message: :see above Uthanc 15:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps we should have our own Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense? Is it against the rules? Uthanc 15:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hoax pages 

message: See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Middle-earth#Recent deletions. Been away for a while, trying to get back into the swing of things round this WikiProject, and I find that Middle-earth in popular culture got deleted! :-( From memory, it was unsourced, but it was the beginnings of an article on the subject, and contrary to what the people at the AfD said, there have been studies on this topic. Carcharoth 09:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A mirror copy of the 'Middle-earth in popular culture' article can be seen here. Carcharoth 11:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New deletion stuff