Talk:The Fellowship of the Ring
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Just to note: the name of the place is Middle Earth, not Middle-earth, and the Ringwraiths are Black Riders, not Dark Riders. I suspect some copyedits were made by back-translating from other languages. Just FYI. - Zadcat
No, the place is Middle-earth according to Tolkien and Wikipedia convention. You are right about the Ringwraiths though. --General Wesc
Contents |
[edit] Requested move
- The Fellowship of the Ring (book) → The Fellowship of the Ring;
- The Two Towers (book) → The Two Towers;
- The Return of the King (book) → The Return of the King;
- The Fellowship of the Ring (movie) → The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring;
- The Two Towers (movie) → The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers;
- The Return of the King (movie) → The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King - The Lord of the Rings: is the full name of the movies and that makes the (book) useless too. - 68.72.128.19 22:09, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation and sign your vote with ~~~~
- Support [where is the discussion for this?] —Michael Z. 2005-04-27 23:17 Z
- Neutral on books & Oppose movies, I don't have a problem removal of "(book)", but not with the movies (should be like "The Fellowship of the Ring (movie)") Cburnett 06:14, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
- Support books, as the books are the primary use and the most commonly linked to. This would make linking easier. Not as sure about the movie proposal, though. Jonathunder 00:51, 2005 Apr 30 (UTC)
- Support books, but Oppose movies. Fornadan 16:44, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
- Support books so long as a "The Fellowship of the Ring (disambiguation)" page is created (and for other articles). Oppose, films. K1Bond007 20:31, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
- Support books & Oppose movies. If the the books are moved then the current disambiguation page currently at the title name, will have to be moved to The Fellowship of the Ring (disambiguation) etc and a first line will have to be added to each book page pointing to the disambiguation page. Philip Baird Shearer 09:26, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
Voting over, see Decision below
[edit] Discussion
I oppose the proposed moves for the movies. Both the books and movies have LotR in the title (so that's factually wrong). If we're going with The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, & The Return of the King for the books then it should be The Fellowship of the Ring (movie), The Two Towers (movie), & The Return of the King (movie).
Though, I would much rather support Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring & Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (movie), etc. and redirect appropriately because I disagree with the "common name" convention and disbelieve that redirects are bad. Cburnett 06:14, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
- No, I don't believe the individually parts of the books (unlike the movies) have TLotR in the title. Eric119 18:00, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Are the Books in The Fellowship of the Ring unnamed?
- They are as published, but Tolkien did have titles for all six books of his novel. They were cancelled as the decision was made to publish the LotR in three volumes. As a result there are some variant titles.
- Book 1: The Return of the Shadow / The Ring Sets Out
- Book 2: The Fellowship of the Ring / The Ring Goes South
- Book 3: The Treason of Isengard
- Book 4: The Journey to Mordor / The Ring Goes East
- Book 5: The War of the Ring
- Book 6: The End of the Third Age
- HTH, HAND. -- Jordi·✆ 10:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Decision
All books have been moved but the movies have be left where they are. Some disambiguation may be required at the top of these articles. violet/riga (t) 10:58, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Policy violation
This page is currently violating WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE section seven, as it is nothing more than a plot summary of The Fellowship of the Ring. It will continue to be in violation until it adds real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's achievements, impact or historical significance.
Given that this is Lord of the Rings, the current state of affairs is deplorable. Perhaps a section discussing the symbolism of the novel, or something similar, is in order?