Talk:Galadriel

Galadriel has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 1, 2020. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Galadriel article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 90 days

Celeborn was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 6 December 2019 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Galadriel. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Middle-earth High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien, his legendarium, and related topics. Please visit the project talk page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles.Middle-earthWikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earthTemplate:WikiProject Middle-earthTolkien articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note: Though it states in the Guide to writing better articles that generally fictional articles should be written in present tense, all Tolkien legendarium-related articles that cover in-universe material before the current action must be written in past tense. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards for more information about this and other article standards.

Film: British

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Why is there a redirect from Celeborn?

Neither Celeborn nor Celebrían have their own pages; do they not meet the not ability criteria, or something else? It seems odd to have those names just redirect to the pages of their spouses. Cinnamingirl (talk) 02:11, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Someone renamed this article to "Galadriel and Celeborn" then someone else named it back. Anyway, a lot of Tolkien-related stubs have been deleted recently, so now would probably not be the time to start a new Celeborn article... AnonMoos (talk) 22:04, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Given that Celeborn redirects here, it would seem sensible to have his name in the title really. What do other editors think? Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:26, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like that would escalate Celeborn's notability to seem roughly equal to that of Galadriel. It may be simpler to have a hatnote that says "Celeborn" redirects here. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 20:29, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that the title of the article should be changed to include Celeborn. Unlike the sources I've seen in other couple-styled articles for the project, the vast majority of the secondary sources, both academic and popular ones, specifically discuss Galadriel, with Celeborn often mentioned in passing or deemed irrelevant. In certain media adaptations of LOTR, which many editors seem to emphasize as an indicator of notability due to the coverage they inevitably generate, he is omitted entirely; even Peter Jackson didn't bring him back for The Hobbit films. So the character's notability is not at all roughly equal to Galadriel, and I think there is a good reason why the casting for her role was the first one to be announced for the upcoming Amazon TV show adaptation with no mention of him. I propose opening up a section to including a discussion about The History of Galadriel and Celeborn, a chapter from part 2 of Unfinished Tales. This article currently lacks a creation and conception section, which could discuss the multiple unused iterations of Galadriel's backstory written behind-the-scenes by Tolkien, and that is where Celeborn could be discussed within the context of that chapter. The French and Spanish language versions are also rated as good articles and seem to have more coverage on their relationship so maybe we could take a look and see how they do it? However, it is likely Celeborn's role will be fleshed out and expanded for Amazon TV show, and by the time it premieres I believe there should be enough coverage from secondary sources to support splitting the character into a standalone article. Just to clarify, the fictional biography section should only contain the account of Galadriel's backstory as told in the Silmarillion. Any other supplemental material from published books like Unfinished Tales can go into the section I propose, as mixing them together may be confusing due to the sometimes contradictory version of events. Haleth (talk) 04:06, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I agree both that Celeborn needs more coverage (and that he'll likely get it via the TV series), and that there's scope for more on the couple from Unfinished Tales in a 'Concept and creation' section. That means that the plan is to create a Celeborn article as soon as there are sufficient Reliable Sources. Scholar finds over 500 possible sources for him, though many are evidently minor, so waiting seems best right now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:19, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The only source I can see so far that specifically goes into detail about Celeborn is this one: The Celeblain of Celeborn and Galadriel, which does go into detailed analysis about the chapter from Unfinished Tales. Unlike a few articles I've recreated like Goldberry and Melian, I had been unable to find any reliable secondary sources covering Celeborn which would convincingly refute the consensus to merge as well as the opinions of any potential objectors. Haleth (talk) 12:33, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We certainly can't recreate the article on the basis of that article alone, even if it weren't from the pre-peer-reviewed days of Mythlore. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request to insert Morfydd Clark

I am a fan of LOTR from India. I have read JRR Tolkien's books, watched Peter Jackson's films and also watched the eight episodes of The Rings of Power series.

I am being prevented from inserting a poster depicting Morfydd Clark as Galadriel. If someone in has uploaded an appropriate picture of Ms. Clark as Galadriel in Wikimedia Commons, please insert that picture in the place of my poster. Anirudh131819 (talk) 06:33, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Bot has removed the image because it is not licensed to be here. Actually there isn't room for it either: that short section is already heavy with images. If someone gets a nice pic of Clark that is CC-by-SA then of course we can include it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:34, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap I don't believe in the "there isn't room for it" part. If the picture of Rebecca Jackson Mendoza is removed, then there will definitely be a room for Ms. Clark. The Toronto theatre version of LOTR is not internationally popular, whereas the Amazon Prime is internationally popular. In fact, in my country, India, Amazon Prime claims that The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power is the number one web series in India. Therefore, the Wikipedia readers worldwide would identify easily with Ms. Clark than with Ms. Mendoza.

I am definitely waiting for a person to come up with a nice pic of Clark and to insert it here, and if that person approves, I will remove Mendoza to make room for Clark. Anirudh131819 (talk) 10:42, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for discussing. However, the historic adaptations including the Toronto one are definitely of encyclopedic interest; further, the Mendoza image is used and licensed only here (to be clear, that means the image file would be deleted if it were removed) whereas the Clark image is available elsewhere. Your proposal would be therefore be disruptive. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:19, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as a "blank image" – what you inserted appears as a jumble of broken syntax to the reader. OK you thought it might be helpful, but your editing is now directly becoming disruptive; please obtain consensus (not just me, other editors too) before continuing. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:32, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap I understand that there is no such a thing as blank images. I sincerely apologize for my impatience. Meanwhile, I will wait for a third person to contribute to this conversation. That will resolve this matter in a way that will benefit the international audience. Anirudh131819 (talk) 11:55, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:13, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear editors, please note that this topic is still open. Every act of contribution to this topic is welcome. Anirudh131819 (talk) 08:22, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again. Well, everyone may note that arguing with the licensing bot isn't going to get anyone very far, you can't do that. If a free image becomes available, we can probably find a place for it. For a non-free image, there's clearly an issue as the Adaptations section already contains three non-free images, which are (already) straying out of the section, so it is already (very) crowded. Policy (WP:IG) forbids the use of any kind of image gallery for non-free images, i.e. a table or box or list or anything of that sort for them is not allowed. No amount of vague talk of "benefit[ing] the international audience" will cut through the direct policy limitations here. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:41, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Sketch Map of Middle-earth.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eärendil ?

I don't easily see the right table syntax to add him, but shouldn't Eärendil be listed at least as spouse to Elwing in this chart? ashnazg (talk) 13:01, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All Tolkien's trees are highly interconnected. We can't show everything in each one, and this one is already big. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]