Forum:Proposed article renamings - Revision history

KingAragorn Bot: Bot message: re-linked.

2012-03-20T15:40:29Z

Bot message: re-linked.

KingAragorn at 11:16, 15 November 2011

2011-11-15T11:16:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:16, 15 November 2011
Line 3:		Line 3:
	<!-- Start writing after this line -->		<!-- Start writing after this line -->
	Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.		Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.
−	*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)	+	*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Final Battle\|Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
	*I think [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?		*I think [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?
	That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Mithbot: Bot Message: changing link to Aragorn

2011-01-10T17:46:47Z

Bot Message: changing link to Aragorn

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:46, 10 January 2011
Line 4:		Line 4:
	Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.		Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.
	*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
−	*I think [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?	+	*I think [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?
	That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Line 16:		Line 16:
	: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

−	I drop my proposal for [[Aragorn Elessar]]. I still think [[Melkor]] should be a more primary article than [[Morgoth]]. And yes, considering I've been doing heavy linguistic edits on the sites, I entirely appreciate the irony of "Aragorn Elessar". It would either have to be "Aracorno Elessar" or "Aragorn Edhelharn", but none of these terms has common use. Then again, there ''is'' "Elessar (character)"...but that would gloss over that his original name was always Aragorn. I'll just let that particular issue be for now. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)	+	I drop my proposal for [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. I still think [[Melkor]] should be a more primary article than [[Morgoth]]. And yes, considering I've been doing heavy linguistic edits on the sites, I entirely appreciate the irony of "Aragorn Elessar". It would either have to be "Aracorno Elessar" or "Aragorn Edhelharn", but none of these terms has common use. Then again, there ''is'' "Elessar (character)"...but that would gloss over that his original name was always Aragorn. I'll just let that particular issue be for now. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

	Oh, by the way, on a ''totally unrelated matter'', has anyone seen what I did with [[Tolkien Gateway:Userboxes]]? I created some new ones too. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		Oh, by the way, on a ''totally unrelated matter'', has anyone seen what I did with [[Tolkien Gateway:Userboxes]]? I created some new ones too. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Mithbot: Bot Message: changing link to Aragorn

2011-01-10T17:44:38Z

Bot Message: changing link to Aragorn

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:44, 10 January 2011
Line 4:		Line 4:
	Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.		Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.
	*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
−	*I think [[Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?	+	*I think [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?
	That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Line 13:		Line 13:

	*I wouldn’t object to moving [[Morgoth]] to [[Melkor]], but neither am I strongly in favour. After all, it is as ''Morgoth'' that he plays the role that he is best known for in the Legendarium: that of the original Dark Lord of the First Era.		*I wouldn’t object to moving [[Morgoth]] to [[Melkor]], but neither am I strongly in favour. After all, it is as ''Morgoth'' that he plays the role that he is best known for in the Legendarium: that of the original Dark Lord of the First Era.
−	*On [[Aragorn II]] I agree completely with Ederchil. The idea ''Aragorn Elessar'' is a useable, let alone acceptable, name betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the linguistic sensitivities of the man who once said he wrote ''[[The Lord of the Rings]]'' to create a world in which ''elen síla lumenn’ omentielvo'' was a common form of greeting.	+	*On [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] I agree completely with Ederchil. The idea ''Aragorn Elessar'' is a useable, let alone acceptable, name betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the linguistic sensitivities of the man who once said he wrote ''[[The Lord of the Rings]]'' to create a world in which ''elen síla lumenn’ omentielvo'' was a common form of greeting.
	: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Mith: Reverted edits by Mithbot (Talk) to last revision by Mith

2010-08-07T22:57:27Z

Reverted edits by Mithbot (Talk) to last revision by Mith

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:57, 7 August 2010
Line 4:		Line 4:
	Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.		Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.
	*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
−	*I think [[~~Aragorn\|~~Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?	+	*I think [[Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?
	That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Line 13:		Line 13:

	*I wouldn’t object to moving [[Morgoth]] to [[Melkor]], but neither am I strongly in favour. After all, it is as ''Morgoth'' that he plays the role that he is best known for in the Legendarium: that of the original Dark Lord of the First Era.		*I wouldn’t object to moving [[Morgoth]] to [[Melkor]], but neither am I strongly in favour. After all, it is as ''Morgoth'' that he plays the role that he is best known for in the Legendarium: that of the original Dark Lord of the First Era.
−	*On [[~~Aragorn\|~~Aragorn II]] I agree completely with Ederchil. The idea ''Aragorn Elessar'' is a useable, let alone acceptable, name betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the linguistic sensitivities of the man who once said he wrote ''[[The Lord of the Rings]]'' to create a world in which ''elen síla lumenn’ omentielvo'' was a common form of greeting.	+	*On [[Aragorn II]] I agree completely with Ederchil. The idea ''Aragorn Elessar'' is a useable, let alone acceptable, name betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the linguistic sensitivities of the man who once said he wrote ''[[The Lord of the Rings]]'' to create a world in which ''elen síla lumenn’ omentielvo'' was a common form of greeting.
	: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Mithbot: Bot Message: changing link to Aragorn

2010-08-07T22:33:24Z

Bot Message: changing link to Aragorn

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:33, 7 August 2010
Line 4:		Line 4:
	Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.		Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.
	*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
−	*I think [[Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?	+	*I think [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?
	That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Line 13:		Line 13:

	*I wouldn’t object to moving [[Morgoth]] to [[Melkor]], but neither am I strongly in favour. After all, it is as ''Morgoth'' that he plays the role that he is best known for in the Legendarium: that of the original Dark Lord of the First Era.		*I wouldn’t object to moving [[Morgoth]] to [[Melkor]], but neither am I strongly in favour. After all, it is as ''Morgoth'' that he plays the role that he is best known for in the Legendarium: that of the original Dark Lord of the First Era.
−	*On [[Aragorn II]] I agree completely with Ederchil. The idea ''Aragorn Elessar'' is a useable, let alone acceptable, name betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the linguistic sensitivities of the man who once said he wrote ''[[The Lord of the Rings]]'' to create a world in which ''elen síla lumenn’ omentielvo'' was a common form of greeting.	+	*On [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] I agree completely with Ederchil. The idea ''Aragorn Elessar'' is a useable, let alone acceptable, name betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the linguistic sensitivities of the man who once said he wrote ''[[The Lord of the Rings]]'' to create a world in which ''elen síla lumenn’ omentielvo'' was a common form of greeting.
	: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Mith: Reverted edits by Mithbot (Talk) to last revision by Ederchil

2010-08-07T15:34:34Z

Reverted edits by Mithbot (Talk) to last revision by Ederchil

Mithbot: Bot Message: changing link to Aragorn

2010-08-07T15:34:13Z

Bot Message: changing link to Aragorn

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:34, 7 August 2010
Line 4:		Line 4:
	Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.		Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.
	*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
−	*I think [[Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?	+	*I think [[Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?
	That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Line 16:		Line 16:
	: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

−	I drop my proposal for [[Aragorn Elessar]]. I still think [[Melkor]] should be a more primary article than [[Morgoth]]. And yes, considering I've been doing heavy linguistic edits on the sites, I entirely appreciate the irony of "Aragorn Elessar". It would either have to be "Aracorno Elessar" or "Aragorn Edhelharn", but none of these terms has common use. Then again, there ''is'' "Elessar (character)"...but that would gloss over that his original name was always Aragorn. I'll just let that particular issue be for now. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)	+	I drop my proposal for [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. I still think [[Melkor]] should be a more primary article than [[Morgoth]]. And yes, considering I've been doing heavy linguistic edits on the sites, I entirely appreciate the irony of "Aragorn Elessar". It would either have to be "Aracorno Elessar" or "Aragorn Edhelharn", but none of these terms has common use. Then again, there ''is'' "Elessar (character)"...but that would gloss over that his original name was always Aragorn. I'll just let that particular issue be for now. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

	Oh, by the way, on a ''totally unrelated matter'', has anyone seen what I did with [[Tolkien Gateway:Userboxes]]? I created some new ones too. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		Oh, by the way, on a ''totally unrelated matter'', has anyone seen what I did with [[Tolkien Gateway:Userboxes]]? I created some new ones too. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Mithbot: Bot Message: changing link to Arwen

2010-07-01T13:27:40Z

Bot Message: changing link to Arwen

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:27, 1 July 2010
Line 29:		Line 29:
	:Well, I disagree. I personally think ''all'' articles should be listed on the name most commonly used by the general public - it makes it easier for people to find the articles that way. Aragorn should be "Aragorn" I think, and, similarly, Melkor should be on "Morgoth" because that's the name most people use. It does annoy me that I type in "Frodo" and get redirected to "Frodo Baggins", for instance: we all know that when someone is looking for, e.g., "Frodo", "Aragorn", "Arwen", "Morgoth" etc. etc. they are looking for Frodo Baggins, Aragorn II Elessar, Arwen Evenstar, and Melkor so why not just have the full articles located in "Frodo", "Aragorn", "Arwen" and "Morgoth" instead?		:Well, I disagree. I personally think ''all'' articles should be listed on the name most commonly used by the general public - it makes it easier for people to find the articles that way. Aragorn should be "Aragorn" I think, and, similarly, Melkor should be on "Morgoth" because that's the name most people use. It does annoy me that I type in "Frodo" and get redirected to "Frodo Baggins", for instance: we all know that when someone is looking for, e.g., "Frodo", "Aragorn", "Arwen", "Morgoth" etc. etc. they are looking for Frodo Baggins, Aragorn II Elessar, Arwen Evenstar, and Melkor so why not just have the full articles located in "Frodo", "Aragorn", "Arwen" and "Morgoth" instead?

−	:Furthermore, it also stop re-directs inside the wiki (e.g. look at how many of the links to [[Arwen Evenstar]] go via [[Arwen]]: [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Arwen_Evenstar]]). By the way, Wikipedia, the Encyclopedia of Arda, Tuckborough, Everything2 all seem to follow my suggestions on linking articles, but the OneWiki follows Gilgamesh's proposal. The Tolkien Wiki is 50/50. All of them link direct to "Frodo Baggins", so I am willing to concede the point on that.	+	:Furthermore, it also stop re-directs inside the wiki (e.g. look at how many of the links to [[Arwen\|Arwen Evenstar]] go via [[Arwen]]: [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Arwen_Evenstar]]). By the way, Wikipedia, the Encyclopedia of Arda, Tuckborough, Everything2 all seem to follow my suggestions on linking articles, but the OneWiki follows Gilgamesh's proposal. The Tolkien Wiki is 50/50. All of them link direct to "Frodo Baggins", so I am willing to concede the point on that.

	:I know I'm swimming against the tide on this one, though. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 15:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)		:I know I'm swimming against the tide on this one, though. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 15:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

	::Been bold here, because I partially agree with Mith. Arwen, Gimli, Boromir, Faramir were needlessly disambiguated. I left Aragorn II alone because of the surrent discussion (though I favour moving it to "Aragorn"). On Melkor/Morgoth, I favour Morgoth. On Frodo, I prefer it if we kept the surname. -- {{User:Ederchil/sig}} 20:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC)		::Been bold here, because I partially agree with Mith. Arwen, Gimli, Boromir, Faramir were needlessly disambiguated. I left Aragorn II alone because of the surrent discussion (though I favour moving it to "Aragorn"). On Melkor/Morgoth, I favour Morgoth. On Frodo, I prefer it if we kept the surname. -- {{User:Ederchil/sig}} 20:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Ederchil at 20:16, 12 February 2010

2010-02-12T20:16:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:16, 12 February 2010
Line 32:		Line 32:

	:I know I'm swimming against the tide on this one, though. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 15:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)		:I know I'm swimming against the tide on this one, though. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 15:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
		+
		+	::Been bold here, because I partially agree with Mith. Arwen, Gimli, Boromir, Faramir were needlessly disambiguated. I left Aragorn II alone because of the surrent discussion (though I favour moving it to "Aragorn"). On Melkor/Morgoth, I favour Morgoth. On Frodo, I prefer it if we kept the surname. -- {{User:Ederchil/sig}} 20:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:46, 10 January 2011
Line 4:		Line 4:
	Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.		Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.
	*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
−	*I think [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?	+	*I think [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?
	That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Line 16:		Line 16:
	: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

−	I drop my proposal for [[Aragorn Elessar]]. I still think [[Melkor]] should be a more primary article than [[Morgoth]]. And yes, considering I've been doing heavy linguistic edits on the sites, I entirely appreciate the irony of "Aragorn Elessar". It would either have to be "Aracorno Elessar" or "Aragorn Edhelharn", but none of these terms has common use. Then again, there ''is'' "Elessar (character)"...but that would gloss over that his original name was always Aragorn. I'll just let that particular issue be for now. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)	+	I drop my proposal for [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. I still think [[Melkor]] should be a more primary article than [[Morgoth]]. And yes, considering I've been doing heavy linguistic edits on the sites, I entirely appreciate the irony of "Aragorn Elessar". It would either have to be "Aracorno Elessar" or "Aragorn Edhelharn", but none of these terms has common use. Then again, there ''is'' "Elessar (character)"...but that would gloss over that his original name was always Aragorn. I'll just let that particular issue be for now. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

	Oh, by the way, on a ''totally unrelated matter'', has anyone seen what I did with [[Tolkien Gateway:Userboxes]]? I created some new ones too. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		Oh, by the way, on a ''totally unrelated matter'', has anyone seen what I did with [[Tolkien Gateway:Userboxes]]? I created some new ones too. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:40, 20 March 2012
Line 3:		Line 3:
	<!-- Start writing after this line -->		<!-- Start writing after this line -->
	Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.		Especially since I don't have higher user priveleges and this is a wiki of multiple users, I'm posting this to seek consensus on an issue.
−	*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Final Battle\|Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)	+	*I think the primary article for Melkor should be at [[Morgoth\|Melkor]] and not [[Morgoth]]. True, he is primarily known as Morgoth during the events in Beleriand in the First Age (it's the epithet [[Fëanor]] gave him during that age), but he is primarily referred to as Melkor in other eras. Even as the [[King's Men]] in [[Númenor]] gain more dominance, don't they worship ''Melkor'' instead of ''Morgoth'', since it's the name [[Sauron]] preferred to call him? ''Melkor'' means "mighty", and ''Morgoth'' means "black enemy", afterall, and Melkor was certainly not Sauron's enemy. Also, I seem to recall [[Final Battle\|Dagor Dagorath]] details referring to him mainly as ''Melkor''—once again, ''Morgoth'' is primarily a Fëanor-era name. In the long run scheme of things (in terms of the story's timeline), ''Melkor'' seems the more meaningful name. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
	*I think [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?		*I think [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] should instead be [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. He was ''Aragorn II'', but as a [[Chieftain of the Dúnedain]]. When he assumed his greater role, he became ''Elessar''. But of course we can't forget he is also ''Aragorn'', and I've seen the name ''Aragorn Elessar'' around. Bad idea?
	That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		That's all I can think of for the time being. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 14:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Line 12:		Line 12:
	I totally agree with the Morgoth/Melkor switch, but Aragorn should just be "Aragorn." --{{User:Breragor/sig}} 19:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)		I totally agree with the Morgoth/Melkor switch, but Aragorn should just be "Aragorn." --{{User:Breragor/sig}} 19:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

−	*I wouldn’t object to moving [[Morgoth]] to [[Melkor]], but neither am I strongly in favour. After all, it is as ''Morgoth'' that he plays the role that he is best known for in the Legendarium: that of the original Dark Lord of the First Era.	+	*I wouldn’t object to moving [[Morgoth]] to [[Morgoth\|Melkor]], but neither am I strongly in favour. After all, it is as ''Morgoth'' that he plays the role that he is best known for in the Legendarium: that of the original Dark Lord of the First Era.
	*On [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] I agree completely with Ederchil. The idea ''Aragorn Elessar'' is a useable, let alone acceptable, name betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the linguistic sensitivities of the man who once said he wrote ''[[The Lord of the Rings]]'' to create a world in which ''elen síla lumenn’ omentielvo'' was a common form of greeting.		*On [[Aragorn\|Aragorn II]] I agree completely with Ederchil. The idea ''Aragorn Elessar'' is a useable, let alone acceptable, name betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the linguistic sensitivities of the man who once said he wrote ''[[The Lord of the Rings]]'' to create a world in which ''elen síla lumenn’ omentielvo'' was a common form of greeting.
	: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		: -- [[User:Mithrennaith\|Mithrennaith]] 01:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

−	I drop my proposal for [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. I still think [[Melkor]] should be a more primary article than [[Morgoth]]. And yes, considering I've been doing heavy linguistic edits on the sites, I entirely appreciate the irony of "Aragorn Elessar". It would either have to be "Aracorno Elessar" or "Aragorn Edhelharn", but none of these terms has common use. Then again, there ''is'' "Elessar (character)"...but that would gloss over that his original name was always Aragorn. I'll just let that particular issue be for now. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)	+	I drop my proposal for [[Aragorn\|Aragorn Elessar]]. I still think [[Morgoth\|Melkor]] should be a more primary article than [[Morgoth]]. And yes, considering I've been doing heavy linguistic edits on the sites, I entirely appreciate the irony of "Aragorn Elessar". It would either have to be "Aracorno Elessar" or "Aragorn Edhelharn", but none of these terms has common use. Then again, there ''is'' "Elessar (character)"...but that would gloss over that his original name was always Aragorn. I'll just let that particular issue be for now. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

	Oh, by the way, on a ''totally unrelated matter'', has anyone seen what I did with [[Tolkien Gateway:Userboxes]]? I created some new ones too. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)		Oh, by the way, on a ''totally unrelated matter'', has anyone seen what I did with [[Tolkien Gateway:Userboxes]]? I created some new ones too. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 02:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Line 25:		Line 25:
	:I added every userbox that I saw listed in the category. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 05:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)		:I added every userbox that I saw listed in the category. - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 05:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

−	So, back to the main issue. Do we have consensus on [[Melkor]]? - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 17:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)	+	So, back to the main issue. Do we have consensus on [[Morgoth\|Melkor]]? - [[User:Gilgamesh\|Gilgamesh]] 17:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

	:Well, I disagree. I personally think ''all'' articles should be listed on the name most commonly used by the general public - it makes it easier for people to find the articles that way. Aragorn should be "Aragorn" I think, and, similarly, Melkor should be on "Morgoth" because that's the name most people use. It does annoy me that I type in "Frodo" and get redirected to "Frodo Baggins", for instance: we all know that when someone is looking for, e.g., "Frodo", "Aragorn", "Arwen", "Morgoth" etc. etc. they are looking for Frodo Baggins, Aragorn II Elessar, Arwen Evenstar, and Melkor so why not just have the full articles located in "Frodo", "Aragorn", "Arwen" and "Morgoth" instead?		:Well, I disagree. I personally think ''all'' articles should be listed on the name most commonly used by the general public - it makes it easier for people to find the articles that way. Aragorn should be "Aragorn" I think, and, similarly, Melkor should be on "Morgoth" because that's the name most people use. It does annoy me that I type in "Frodo" and get redirected to "Frodo Baggins", for instance: we all know that when someone is looking for, e.g., "Frodo", "Aragorn", "Arwen", "Morgoth" etc. etc. they are looking for Frodo Baggins, Aragorn II Elessar, Arwen Evenstar, and Melkor so why not just have the full articles located in "Frodo", "Aragorn", "Arwen" and "Morgoth" instead?