Talk:Tristan

message: Pre-wagner the name was Tristram. Every piece of artwork, poem, writing and even recreated round tables hold the Tristram name and not Tristan. No mention of the Falklands naval vessel Sir Tristram or the race horse Sir Tristram in references. Tristan is a relatively common family name compared to Tristram, which is far rarer. the lead name for the article should be Tristram, not Tristan.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.169.48.220 (talk) 10:35, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Tristram not Tristan

message: This article is fairly detailed. Shall we drop the  now? -- llywrch 19:12, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Dropped, as part of Not a stub; see stubsensor  Rx StrangeLove 00:37, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a stub

message: In the article it says: "Richard Wagner composed what is now considered one of his better operas, Tristan and Isolde." Now, opinions vary but a lot of people consider Tristan and Isolde to be the summit of Western Classical Music - isn't "one of his better operas", well, a little understated?  Gerry Lynch 12:13, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Critics tend not to rank Wagner's mature operas according to overall greatness, and there is no clear consensus that Tristan is a better work than Meistersinger, the Ring, or Parisfal.  But you're right, it does sound mundane as stated.  This is more objective anyways: Richard Wagner's 1859 opera Tristan and Isolde, based on the Tristan legend, is a landmark in the development of western music and the first large-scale application of his 'music drama' theory of operatic construction. Skiptog 15:23, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Phrasing

message: Tristan pages are very confused at this point. We now have this page and an Iseult page (which covers both Iseults), as well as a Tristan & Isolde page, which mostly repeats information found here. Tristan and Isolde is a disambig page, and Tristan and Iseult redirects back here. There are no separate pages for the various poems by the different authors (though Wagner's opera is at Tristan und Isolde. Interlanguage links are even more muddled. Obviously much of this confusion is the result of Iseult's diversely spelled name, but we need to organize these pages. My suggestion is this: 
*Put information about the legend and its development at Tristan and Iseult; redirect Tristan and Isolde, Tristan & Isolde and all other variants to it.
*Redirect the character names of Tristan and Iseult (and variants) to Tristan and Iseult. This way we could centralize information and avoid inconsistancy and repetition.
*If that don't fly, Iseult and redirects could be kept separate because there are several characters of that name, they could all be discussed there; I'd be more skeptical about Tristan.
*Because most authors of Tristan (Gottfried von Strassburg, Thomas of Britain, Beroul, and Eilhard von Oberge) are known chiefly (or solely) for that work, discuss their work at the author's page, as we have been doing.
After solving these issues, it will be easier to improve the pages.--Cúchullain t / c 00:03, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which source/author should be used for the Tristan and Iseult article about the legend? There are variations of the story depending on the author of the information. If a compilation of the different authors is to be used, how about taking out the "The enduring nature of Tristan and Isolde" section from the Tristam page and bits from the Iseult article and placing them in the new article? Stoa 04:06, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking a summary of the major events that occur in all (or almost all) the works. This would include Tristan's arrival at Mark's court, the battle with the Morholt, the wound from the poisoned spear, etc. Then we could go into the sources and the relationship between them without having to rehash everything. I'll probably just start from scratch; that "enduring nature of Tristan and Isolde" section is kind of un-encyclopedic.--Cúchullain t/c 01:18, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Is that merge rather than cleanup?  Or a category?  Coriolise 17:21, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean? --Cúchullain t/c 21:25, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I may be misinterpeting the Wiki terms, but it seems to me the article itself is pretty clean, now.   But I accept without having looked at all of it that the arrangement of the several articles is not as it should be.  That seems to me to be a matter of merging several articles, rather than cleaning up one.  Sorry if that is pedantic, but the tag may direct attention in the wrong place.  Coriolise 14:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article(s) are in a very poor state, hence the cleanup tag. Anyone who is curious or confused can just go to this talk page.--Cúchullain t/c 01:06, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tristan pages

message: "Also, according to Celtic myth, Tristan owned a horse named Bel Joeor."  Is the name significant, or indeed having a horse?  If so it needs a remark, if not, it is oddly placed at the end of that section. Coriolise 10:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The horse running on 

message: I was looking for Henry Baker Tristram but by typing "Tristram" I was redirected to this page.  Can anybody please add a disambiguation page.
Misheu 11:25, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tristram as a name

message: I suspect this section is original research. If there are independent sources for this argument, they should be added and the section should be reframed in a more neutral way.  Otherwise, it should go. Nareek 13:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictish connection 

message: :"    Main article: Tristan and Iseult
:The romantic narrative of the Tristan and Iseult love affair predated and most likely influenced the Arthurian romance of Lancelot and Guinevere. The legend tells of the love affair between Tristan and Iseult of Ireland (the promised bride of Tristan's uncle), and the events and trials that the lovers go through to cover up their secret affair. He also appeared out of the blue hell to make everyones life a living shit stain. Tristan recently created a new wikipedia tab which describes his unreal facts about himself to make people seem highly of himself."
What on earth is this, and why is this section even necessary?  The note about the romance preceeding Arthurian legends is covered in the Tristan and Iseult page, I believe.  Can we do away with this odd little section? Imtinuviel (talk) 13:12, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section: The Tristan and Isolde Romance 

message: Acording to LGBT themes in mythology, this character is bisexual? I havn't done any research yet, but tagged it as there is no mention here of any relationsips with the same sex.
Does anyone know where this comes from (even if disputed)?YobMod 13:12, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bisexual?

message: The article speaks of Brittany "in the north of France". You must remember that, in that time, Brittany was an independant Celtic nation, far more independant than Ireland. And still being in everyday family relation with the sister nations, specially Cornwall and Wales, when the relations with France were often violent. 
From an English, British, American or French angle, we find too often this misunderstanding. 2.10.174.35 (talk) 15:56, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  France and Brittany 

message: Substituted at 09:16, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Shoudn't the See Also section have the obvious link to Tristan and Iseult, and perhaps also Iseult? I ask rather than just doing it because a) it's so obvious it's probably been done & reverted several times; b) I have a hunch there's a WP policy on this. 
From a practical point of view, by the time I've read to the bottom of an article, I expect to see links to closely related articles as well as more distant ones, rather than have to navigate back to the top and search for the half-remembered link in the lead -- especially on my rather inadequate mobile browser. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 14:29, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Those links are included in the article, so they don't belong in the "see also" section (see WP:See also).--Ermenrich (talk) 14:35, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

text: Yes, that's just not how WP works - or there would be a yard-long SA on many articles. Johnbod (talk) 02:24, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  See Also