Talk:The Return of the King
The Return of the King is currently a Language and literature good article nominee. Nominated by Chiswick Chap (talk) at 16:34, 31 October 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: 1955 part of novel by J. R. R. Tolkien |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Return of the King article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 27 January 2020. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article was nominated for merging with The Scouring of the Shire on 20 December 2019. The result of the discussion (permanent link) was not merged. |
This article was selected as the article for improvement on 9 September 2013 for a period of one week. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Use of the Ring to Destroy the Gate of Minas Tirith
[edit]Can I ask where it's stated that the Witch-King uses the power of his ring to destroy the gate? It's not in the Lord of the Rings itself so I think it requires a citation. GimliDotNet (talk) 20:49, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- Reworded: magical power is certainly used, as the ram Grond is bound about with spells. But whether it's from the Ring is another matter. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:55, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Excessive plot/contents detail
[edit]From time to time, editors seek to extend the summaries in this and the other The Lord of the Rings book articles. The novel is obviously much loved, and the many fans of book and film naturally wish to see the articles providing the sort of coverage that they might find in a dedicated Tolkien encyclopedia or fansite.
However, Wikipedia is not such a site, and it deprecates extensive summaries. The existing summaries have been carefully constructed to cover the central narrative, starting with one short sentence per chapter: and the result was already to create rather detailed summaries. These have been polished over the years, and in the main they have reached rather stable form, though of course definite errors can always be fixed. What we can't have is constantly growing length.
The same applies in this volume to the Appendices, which are extremely long and detailed, and of great interest to fans and scholars. Wikipedia again can't begin to reproduce the full content of these extensive sections of the novel, though I daresay that Appendices to The Lord of the Rings would make a fine and scholarly article if properly researched and cited. For the current article, the coverage is necessarily brief, and limited to the key facts. That does mean that many details have to be omitted; again, there are plenty of large books and websites that cover exactly that kind of material in loving detail, which we are obliged to refrain from including.
To give just one example, "Reveals that Sam and Rosie had thirteen children and that Pippin and Merry also respectively married; Pippin's son Faramir married Sam's daughter Goldilocks." is in my view inappropriate for this article in both style ("Reveals" is journalese, not encyclopedic; the article is written in British English sentences) and in content (these are minor details, not central to the narrative). Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- I agree that the details recently added are minor and ought not to be included. The violate the intent and guidelines of WP:SUMMARY and WP:PLOT. Strebe (talk) 19:51, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- Good article nominees
- Good article nominees awaiting review
- Wikipedia articles that use Oxford spelling
- Wikipedia articles that use British English
- Wikipedia former articles for improvement
- B-Class Tolkien articles
- Low-importance Tolkien articles
- B-Class novel articles
- Low-importance novel articles
- WikiProject Novels articles
- B-Class children and young adult literature articles
- Low-importance children and young adult literature articles