Tolkien Gateway

Forum:Canon scale

(Difference between revisions)
(Added reply)
Line 12: Line 12:
  
 
::::Hi, new user. I wrote a note on [[Talk:Glorfindel]] anonymously questioning why this encyclopedia has Orodreth as Gil-galad's father, yet insists on having two Glorfindels. [[User:Rog|Rog]] 22:37, 15 August 2006 (EDT)
 
::::Hi, new user. I wrote a note on [[Talk:Glorfindel]] anonymously questioning why this encyclopedia has Orodreth as Gil-galad's father, yet insists on having two Glorfindels. [[User:Rog|Rog]] 22:37, 15 August 2006 (EDT)
 +
 +
:::::Hey there Rog, glad to have you aboard. Canon is a very difficult issue in the world of [[Arda]], and even more difficult when trying to create 'factual' entries. While some encyclopedias ([http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/ EoA] for instance) prefer to leave out items which are strictly not canon, at TG we'd prefer to include the content while stating the reader be aware that the content is not considered factual by some people. This allows the visitor to make up their own mind as to what should be considered canon, our goal is to be as neutral as possible. Since we are still just a rather small tight group the views on Orodreth and Glorfindels may change in the future and are by no means set in stone. Hope to see you around more often --[[User:Hyarion|Hyarion]] 23:10, 15 August 2006 (EDT)

Revision as of 03:10, 16 August 2006

Tolkien Gateway > Council > Canon scale


I had an idea, what if we created some sort of scale, like 1-5 or 1-10 or something that would specify how canonical (?) an article is considered. Just something to help people identify how scholars view the character/thing. --Hyarion 10:49 2006 (EST)

I don't think one can make a "scale of canonicity". The question of 'canon' or 'non-canon' is far too cmplicated and individualistic I think. One could make a list like 'published', 'postumously published', 'early idea, later discarded', 'late writing', and the like, I guess, with the reader him/herself deciding on canonicity. --Earendilyon 15:24, 5 March 2006 (EST)
You're probably right. But I think even works like The Lord of the Rings aren't perfect. For example in the latest edition Aiglos was changed to Aeglos. In my opinion Aeglos would be considered more canon even though it was altered after J.R.R. Tolkien's death. I guess as long as we specify what makes the character/item/etc canon or non-canon then that would be sufficient. --Hyarion 15:32, 5 March 2006 (EST)
We could add Notes on Canonicity at the end of certain articles, if we think that's necessary, with arguments pro and con its (non)canonicity. --Earendilyon 15:47, 5 March 2006 (EST)
Hi, new user. I wrote a note on Talk:Glorfindel anonymously questioning why this encyclopedia has Orodreth as Gil-galad's father, yet insists on having two Glorfindels. Rog 22:37, 15 August 2006 (EDT)
Hey there Rog, glad to have you aboard. Canon is a very difficult issue in the world of Arda, and even more difficult when trying to create 'factual' entries. While some encyclopedias (EoA for instance) prefer to leave out items which are strictly not canon, at TG we'd prefer to include the content while stating the reader be aware that the content is not considered factual by some people. This allows the visitor to make up their own mind as to what should be considered canon, our goal is to be as neutral as possible. Since we are still just a rather small tight group the views on Orodreth and Glorfindels may change in the future and are by no means set in stone. Hope to see you around more often --Hyarion 23:10, 15 August 2006 (EDT)