Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power season 1

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power season 1 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

The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power season 1 is currently a Television good article nominee. Nominated by adamstom97 (talk) at 16:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.)

Short description: 2022 television season

Middle-earth Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-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.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Television Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as Low-importance).

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power was copied or moved into The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power (season 1). The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Blatantly biased article and apparently censorship to anyone who disagrees..

This article doesn't even try to have an nuanced/objective POV - I'm in shock. It saddens me deeply that the moderators in charge clearly have forgotten the basic rules and guidelines of this site.. This is just plain embarrassing to begin with - I can't even count how many guidelines this article violates. And before my comment gets deleted (which I'm sure it does) how come we can't have an open minded nuanced discussion about the subject? - or it easier to just silence anyone who dare question the main agenda? Laroucan (talk) 12:12, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Laroucan Do you have specific edits you would suggest making to the article? Or do you want to just generically rage against the article? The former is the correct pathway to have proper discourse about editing on Wikipedia, while the latter will not lead anywhere productive. Not a single editor has been censored for properly working on this page, and there is no political or other form of agenda on Wikipedia beyond following the basic rules, guidelines, and essays, including but not limited to MOS:TV, WP:POV, WP:DUE, WP:OR, WP:RS, WP:UGC, WP:AGF, and WP:FORUM. If you would kindly point to specific areas where this or related articles violate any of these or other policies, that would be helpful. Otherwise, this is not the place to discuss the reasons for you not liking the show. Have a good week. TNstingray (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Audience response - metrics

Is there a reason why there are no quantitative metrics/descriptive statistics in section for Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, IMDB, and Fandango audience reviews? Before I spend time putting them in the article I would like to know if they are banned. 2601:646:9E02:6D60:8953:AF7C:387C:ED5B (talk) 04:51, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't use audience ratings like that per WP:USERGENERATED, although this article does have commentary on the audience ratings from reliable sources. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:38, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Title still in italics

The title for this page still has "season 1" displaying in italics. Couldn't figure out how to change it. What an absolute mess this completely unnecessary change has caused (I wish I had known about the discussion so I could have voted against it....) TNstingray (talk) 18:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At first glance I don't see any difference between this article and the one for S2 that would explain why it is working for S2 and not S1. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is fixed now. - adamstom97 (talk) 12:46, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Critical response wording

For anyone watching this page who is not watching The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power season 2, there is currently a discussion at Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power season 2#Reception wording that could impact this article. The intention is to come to a consensus on the wording for Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic data across the Rings of Power articles. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:57, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FORBESCON

@Wikibenboy94: re your tag for this Forbes source, in my experience Paul Tassi is considered a subject-matter expert for the entertainment industry so is allowed to be used per the requrirements at WP:FORBESCON. Per his bio he has been writing articles on the industry for 10 years and his reviews are also on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic. - adamstom97 (talk) 13:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikibenboy94: any concerns with the tag being removed? - adamstom97 (talk) 07:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this should be discussed first for a consensus. Just because you might be a subject-matter expert in a certain field, that doesn't make any data and news you publish in that field infallible. Tassi has also discussed stories that are just reports and rumours, such as here. I think if he only published reviews on film and TV (as he is a certified critic on RT and Metacritic), then yes he could probably be used. Wikibenboy94 (talk) 08:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused, the article you linked to is about a direct statement from a company not a rumour. And the article we are talking about in this discussion is about the top 10 ranking on Prime Video which isn't a rumour, report, or anything else seemingly controversial. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the article I was thinking of. But even if Tassi links to official sources (like Amazon) as proof, he might mention other unsourced stats or info that is not accurate. Wikibenboy94 (talk) 10:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, though I think the way he presents the rumour in that article is fine considering he also includes the official information and makes it clear which is which. Even reliable sources discuss unreliable rumours at times, the problem is when they present unreliable rumours as facts and don't provide appropriate context. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced this source with a better one that has viewership data from Amazon rather than commentary on the Prime Video top 10. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Approach to the cast list

For anyone watching this page who is not watching The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, I have started a discussion at Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power#Approach to the cast lists that could impact this article. I have proposed a new approach to determining the cast lists for this series and am hoping to get feedback from interested editors. - adamstom97 (talk) 13:21, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]