Talk:Faramir

message: Blonde, anyway? I think blonde on an adult male looks ABNORMAL! By the way, does PETER JACKSON hate Faramir? Who would dislike Faramir anyhow? He's against war, sweet, and helpful (Well, he was nice to Frodo and Sam!), and I like that on a person.
Okay, I agree that Faramir was abused througout the movie series. But what Peter Jackson really tried to do was to tear him away from Eowyn so she'd like Aragorn (apparently).
In summary:
Eowyn + Aragorn = NO WAY HOZAY!
Eowyn + Faramir = YES!!!
Aragorn + Arwen = YES!!!
Hehhehheh...sorry. Well, and there is some rumor Sam and Faramir are the same age. NO WAY! SAM IS OLDER!
In summary:
Sam: age 39
Faramir: age 36
39 > 36
Hehehehe...I love anyone who is nice like Faramir. Besides, Tolkien probably intentioned for Faramir to be totally different from Boromir. Most of the time when Faramir was very little, his mother Finduilas cared for him, but Denethor hated Faramir (this has a little bit to do with Cinderella, I think, as Cinderella's stepmother hated her so much), and when Finduilas died, Boromir protected Faramir. And without Boromir, Denethor could have made Faramir do work all day and wear old torn-up clothes. 
So you have it. Denethor was cruel to Faramir, and Boromir defended Faramir.
Okay. Well, here's a family tree.
[Sorry to intrude on somebody else's comment and throw off the chronology of this, but this family tree needs to be fixed. Honestly, it screws up the rest of the page. I tried fixing it, and on the preview it looked fine, but it turned out making it worse. Please revert to the original, and fix it. --queso man 18:31, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was sort of a technicality. But Faramir was the one who passed over the crown to Aragorn, and he retained the office of Steward afterwards, although it returned to its earlier function (that of advisor to the King, although it was probably mostly an honorary title since Faramir didn't even live in Minas Tirith). --Aranel ("Sarah") 19:00, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: "On the day of the coronation, Faramir surrendered his Stewardship. Aragorn, however, renewed the office..." Formally, it didn't work that way. Aragorn handed the Rod of the Stewards back to Faramir and told him that his office was not ended. Had Aragorn accepted the Rod, he would have become Steward. Instead, he ordered Faramir to do his job as Steward, which was to have the people accept him as King. This is perhaps a subtle point. Wastrel Way (talk) 02:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  Amidst a not-very-good 20-year-old thread that would today be deleted per NOTFORUM ... ok, well yes, technically correct, but I doubt one reader in a thousand would detect the difference in meaning from the current text. I suppose we could say that F. "offered to surrender" the stewardship, but since we've said that A. renewed it, we've got the bases covered really. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Aragorn entered the city only as a Ranger of the North — not as the heir of Isildur. Thus Faramir technically reigned from the suicide of Denethor to Aragorn’s coronation (not that he had much choice in the matter). {Ⓐℕάℛℹℴɴ} 21:23, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: An anonymous user at 70.181.69.136  recently added some text to this article that appears to be taken from this site.  This may be a violation of the site's copyright, unless the anon is the copyright holder.  I've reverted it for now, and if the anon is the copyright holder he or she can restore the text.  —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:09, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright violation 

message: Some of the quotations are from the books, some from the films.  The differences should be noted. Savidan 23:42, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That is noted.  Not sure if the quotation format to note the books are correct though.  If anyone does know, feel free to edit please! Mirlen 03:09, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotations 

message: Okay, I agree that Faramir was abused througout the movie series. But what Peter Jackson really tried to do was to tear him away from Eowyn so she'd like Aragorn (apparently).
In summary:
Eowyn + Aragorn = NO WAY HOZAY!
Eowyn + Faramir = YES!!!
Aragorn + Arwen = YES!!!
Peter Jackson does not hate Faramir. The issue was not whether he was likeable, but whether, in a film lacking any other demonstrations of the Ring's power, Faramir's seeming immunity to its power was believable or dramatically interesting. They didn't abuse him, they made him believable. He still let Frodo and Sam go, and acts in accordance with the book in the third film.
It had nothing to do with Eowyn's relationship with Aragorn. Need I remind you that both couples hook up the same way as in the book by the end of the third movie. Need I also remind you of Eowyn's obvious feelings for Aragorn in the book, which provoke her into following the Rohirrim into battle?
Hehhehheh...sorry. Well, and there is some rumor Sam and Faramir are the same age. NO WAY! SAM IS OLDER!
In summary:
Sam: age 39
Faramir: age 36
I don't know where you're getting your information. They ARE the same age. 
From The Return of the King, Appendix B:
Year 2983: Faramir son of Denethor born. Birth of Samwise.
Kenobifan 03:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age and hate 

message: I have question.  Does anyone know the difference between Captain of the White Tower and Captain-General/or Captain-General of the White Tower?  Because Faramir inherits the title, Captain of the White Tower, after his brother's death—which from one source states that he now takes over command of Gondor's armies, but when I look up on Boromir's article on wikipedia, Captain of the White Tower is not the same thing as Captain-General of the White Tower, so I am rather confused.  What is the difference?  What is the position that Faramir inherits? —Mirlen 13:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: These ranks were not clearly defined by Tolkien that I know of, but I would guess that 'Captain of Gondor' was a rank held by a fairly important military leader (note that Eärnur was heir to the throne and so called when he led Gondor's forces against Angmar) while 'Captain-General' was reserved for the overall field-commander of all Gondor's armies. It is possible that the terms were synonymous, but Captain-General usually has other connotations and it doesn't seem likely that Faramir would have been 'promoted' to the position before Boromir's death was proven. Whether there was any distinction between 'Captain-General' and 'High Warden of the White Tower' is also unclear. --CBDunkerson 21:57, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rank

message: Mirlen, thanks for all the added stuff you put, but I think it has too much information on a charecter who didn't play a huge role in the Lord of the Rings books. We all love Faramir but Damn! I think we should prune/summarize some of the info. Ted87 18:39, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha, now that you've pointed it out, maybe you're right, Ted87 :P.  I admit I can carried away with my favorite characters *blushes*.  I'll try to resist my temptation and cut it down a bit...or maybe a lot :P. —Mirlen 22:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much info? 

message: I have just come across this article, and many similar ones, after seeing the article on Tolkien reach featured status. This article about Faramir doesn't feel very encyclopedic to me, and in places is written in the style of biographies about historical people. The article also feels to me more like a summary of the character's story-arc, which is just a different way of doing a plot summary. I have no problem with encyclopedic articles about Tolkien and his works and his influence on fantasy and so on, but this sort of article doesn't seem to add much to the encyclopedia. Isn't there a Tolkien wiki for this kind of stuff? Carcharoth 16:13, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the article is currently a bit overboard. There has been some discussion (above) of cutting it back. There is a Tolkien based wiki and it might be a more 'fitting' place for some of this level of detail, but Wikipedia itself incorporates an equal (and in some cases greater) level of detail for many similar topics. I think material is often put here over the TolkienWiki because of the benefits of having a single source for info on all topics. Maybe a balance will eventually be found in how much detail should be in Wikipedia and then more precise stuff will migrate to the Tolkien wiki and similar sub-projects... but it is equally possible that Wikipedia will become an 'all inclusive' source. --CBDunkerson 17:46, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup, don't worry Carcharoth, Ted and I are working on to cut down the information.  If you have any suggestions on how to cut it down, please feel free to share it.  —Mirlen 19:10, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I corrected a typo in the lead quote, but not sure what else to suggest. I'll have a think about it. One thought I had was referencing the lead quote, but I'm not sure what standard is used here to reference the books. I'll pop that question back on the WikiProject page Carcharoth 23:48, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue is not level of detail per say but style. We can include as much detail as there is as long as its grounded in the books rather than fan fiction. I'd suggest—to get away from the "biography of a real person" style—organizing it by the books (i.e. sections titled "In the Similarion", "In the Two Towers", etc.). savidan(talk) (e@) 17:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this really encyclopedic? 

message: Can we get a better picture of Faramir? You can barely see his face at all in the current one because of the shadow. Surely there's a better one. --::..SMI..:: 09:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um. You do know Faramir is not real, right? All these artworks or film scenes are just based on the imagination of the artist, or the decision of a casting director. For a 'true' picture of Faramir, you need to read all the text from the books that describes his physical appearance. Carcharoth 13:55, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Faramir's Pic

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#:: 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#:: 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#:: 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:Fair representation without bias: 
#:: 
#It is stable.
#:No edit wars etc.: 
#:: 
#It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
#:a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
#:: 
#Overall: 
#:Pass/Fail: 
#:: </div>
Details:
* Lede, I'd like to see a bit more in the lede. There is quite a lot in the Appearances section that could be summarized into the lede, Likewise the Concept section, the fact that Faramir's appearance was a surprise to Tolkien should probably be in the lede.
* Appearances section, Literature subsection. The first few paragraphs are very short and stubby, making the text flow choppy in this section. Consider merging or expanding the paragraphs to make the prose flow easier.
* Same section and subsection, the parantage of Faramir needs a citation if it's going to stand alone as a paragraph. If you merge it with the next sentence, the citation on that paragraph will cover the sentence.
* Likewise the last sentence of the third paragraph and a number of the paragraphs after the dream quotation. Much of these paragraphs are unsourced and should probably be sourced. Note that I don't write articles on fictional subjects, so if there is an exception in WP:Fiction, please let me know.
* Same section, Adaptations subsection. the first paragraph is short and choppy and unsourced. 
* Same section and subsection, The second paragraph, last sentence is unsourced.
* Same section and subsection, fifth paragraph. The first sentence, I would reword the second phrase to "for these fans, Faramir..." to make it clear that it is the fans being referred to, not the cast and crew.
* Same section, sixth and seventh paragraph need citations, exspecially the quotation in the seventh paragraph. Quotations should always be cited.
* Names and titles section, second paragraph, you guessed it, needs a citation.
* Concept and creation, the second paragraph jumps to a subject about thee and thou that is very abrupt. Perhaps rework it so that the flow between the first paragraph and the second makes more sense.
* The pictures give me concerns, as using three copyrighted works when you're not discussing those works themselves in the article is probably pushing fair use doctrine too far. Whittle it down to one or at most two. THe movie still strikes me as being used to ID the actor, so probably is safe enough. I'd really rather see no artistic pictures at all. Perhaps a scan of the original copy of Two Towers if you really feel a picture is necessary, which honestly I don't. I'd pass the article easier if it had none, honestly.
* Malachriality's suggestion of a reorg on the article makes sense, and would definitely be useful if you try to take the article to FA. However, this layout works for me fine also.
Overall, a good article. I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address these concerns. Please feel free to contact me here or on my talk page with any questions or concerns.Ealdgyth | Talk 16:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, substantial progress has already been made on some of these points in the sandbox version, especially on the lead and sourcing. Working upon the rest ;) Súrendil (talk) 18:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okies, I'm more than happy to extend the hold for a bit (not forever) if progress is being made. Ealdgyth | Talk 18:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Anyone? Anyone? Ealdgyth | Talk 05:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: From my side, progress is slow - session exams, see. However, Psyche825 has seemingly also embarked on this task, and I will still do what I can. Can you note what should yet be improved in the sandbox version? Súrendil (talk) 12:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Portrayal sections still has some subsections that are stubby and short. Lede is much improved. Things look much better, although if you're going to try for FA, you'll want to avoid wikilinking things in direct quotations. Supposedly, we're supposed to avoid that sort of thing. Ealdgyth | Talk 15:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've expanded the sections throughout the article, and added and updated several references.  If anyone can find more "official" articles discussing Andrew Seear's voice acting in BBC's 1981 radio adaptation, that would be wonderful.  What do you think, Ealdgyth?  And interesting bit about avoiding wikilinks in direct quotations.  Thanks for the tip. —Mirlen 19:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good, but I still have concerns over the number of Fair use images in the article. About ready to move it over to the mainspace?Ealdgyth | Talk 20:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As Súrendil has suggested, perhaps a commentary note can be added — since reorganizing the fair use images and expanding on commentary is not a simple, small process.  Otherwise, I think I'll move it over to the mainspace, and see if other editors have suggestions or edits to go about with the commentary. —Mirlen 02:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Drop me a note on my talk page when you're ready for me to evaluate it again. Ealdgyth | Talk 05:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Oops, sorry.  I was unable to work further on the article concerning fair use images due to school work, forgive me.  But the deal with fair use images in Faramir's article is only a small piece in a jigsaw puzzle, so I'll bring it up with the wikiproject to deal with the probable general problem. —MirlenTalk 23:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: GA review

message: How probable is it that 'militarily inclined younger brothers' of the High Steward (or his heir) were given Ithilien as a domain to prevent the 'powerful uncle interfering in the affairs of, or deposing the young ruling nephew' syndrome?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.73.174.10 (talk) 10:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Faramir and Ithilien

message: See discussion here. It started as a debate on whether the infobox should be removed from Saruman after a recent GA fail, but has moved on to proposed changes to the M-e character infoboxes to make them less in-universe, as required by Wikipedia's guidelines on writing about fiction. All comments welcome. 4u1e (talk) 05:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed changes to infobox 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Faramir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050307023845/http://www.greencine.com:80/article?1=1&action=view&articleID=62&pageID=104 to http://www.greencine.com/article?1=1&action=view&articleID=62&pageID=104
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:11, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Faramir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080207162352/http://www.tednasmith.com/lotr3/TN-Eowyn_and_Faramir.html to http://www.tednasmith.com/lotr3/TN-Eowyn_and_Faramir.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080207162428/http://www.tednasmith.com/lotr3/TN-The_Sun_Unveiled.html to http://www.tednasmith.com/lotr3/TN-The_Sun_Unveiled.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Faramir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080513205959/http://www.sf-worlds.com/lord-of-the-rings/the-lord-of-the-rings-bbc-1981.html to http://www.sf-worlds.com/lord-of-the-rings/the-lord-of-the-rings-bbc-1981.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:27, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Begin discussion moved from user talk:Elphion -- Elphion (talk) 18:08, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussion over time at .  The last entry there sums it up best: fan images are not a WP:RS. -- Elphion (talk) 19:05, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the link and sorry for the little delay! I've followed the advice of De728631 and added the "(fan art, drawn after Tolkien's writings)" clarification.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Murzwin (talk • contribs) 19:21, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: These are not notable images and have no reliable source; they have no business in WP articles. -- Elphion (talk) 14:43, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: How does one define the drawings' "notability"? I guess not through a single-handed decision? Do you believe https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/Faramir-tj01.JPG/368px-Faramir-tj01.JPG with a heavily distorted skull/face geometry (from the Spanish/French article) is more notable? Also, both of the removed drawings have been previously published on DeviantArt: https://www.deviantart.com/murzwin/art/Faramir-785712653 and https://www.deviantart.com/murzwin/art/Lady-Finduilas-of-Gondor-of-Dol-Amroth-785237390 (the color version of Finduilas – does that one work better?)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Murzwin (talk • contribs) 16:31, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

text: I know The Lord of the Rings rather well, for I have read it many times and it's been my favourite book since 1988. Thus, I know virtually everything J.R.R. Tolkien has written about Faramir. Faramir had grey eyes: "Doubt was in the grey eyes that gazed steadily at Frodo". (The Two Towers, Book 4, Ch. The Window on the West). He had raven hair: "... and their hair, raven and golden..." (The Return of the King, Book 6, Ch. The Steward and the King). He was а young man:  "... to tell this grave young man..."  (The Two Towers, Book 4, Ch. The Window on the West). His appearance was like his father's: "...Faramir the younger was like him in looks" (Appendix A, The Stewards) and, according to Tolkien, Denethor had "carven face with its proud bones" (The Return of the King, Book 5, Ch. Minas Tirith). Faramir was handsome:  "... looking on the fair face of Faramir..." (The Houses of the Healing, Book 5, Ch. The Return of the King). And Faramir was beardless. Tolkien wrote that elves' descendants were beardless and Faramir was a descendant of Imrazor and elf Mithrellas: "... there is a discussion of the Elvish strain in Men, as to its being observable in the beardlessness of those who were so descended (it was a characteristic of all Elves to be beardless), and it is here noted in connection with the princely house of Dol Amroth..." (Unfinished Tales, History of Celeborn and Galadriel). Given all of the above, I tried my best to render Faramir following Tolkien's description as closely as possible. I naturally have no intent of promoting myself through WP; my goal was to exactly create an image of Faramir according to the book, which is unfortunately not the case with most of the art found on the Internet. -- Murzwin (talk) 14:56, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm sure that's all true.  But it doesn't answer my points above. WP:RS is the essence of Wikipedia. A person's opinion, no matter how well-informed, is not by itself a reliable source. -- Elphion (talk) 17:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fan art 

message: I've restored the status quo ante as we'd already had a discussion on the matter - there seems no point whatsoever on messing about with the infobox with details with Lord of the Rings. The whole thing is one book. I suggest we just say it's in Lord of the Rings and leave it at that. The fact that the publisher divided it into 3 parts and gave them names isn't terribly relevant to the character. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Inappropriate use of First..Last in infobox

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:11, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion