Talk:The Unpublished Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien

I know of at least one other letter, published (so not really unpublished) in Vinyar Tengwar 6, to a miss J. Sibley from Haddam, Conn., but it's copyrighted (1989, Tolkien Trust).

Also, throughout the early Vinyar Tengwar's, there is reference to "Letters part II", but it is revealed to be a hoax. Is it worth including? -- Ederchil 12:00, 26 May 2008 (EDT)

Sure, why not include it in the "Rumours" section?--Morgan 22:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Revision

I think we need a major revision of this page. "Unpublished" isn't a good word, since quite many letters have found some kind of publication. What is crucial is that they weren't published in The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien. Perhaps "rare", "difficult to find", "hard-to-find" or something else is better (maybe some native English speaker have a suggestion?).

Also, I would suggest making individual pages for each item. Now it's difficult to link to a specific hard-to-find or unpublished letter. (I find it excellent that each of the letters of The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien is given an individual page.)

The question is then how we should give these letters page titles. Suggestions? Start with year, date or name? --Morgan 22:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, a discussion with myself ;-) I'll try and use something similar to the standard used in The Letters, which is: [Name] [Day] [Month] [Year]. Thus, we would easily find all letters to the same person (if such will be the case) in the Category. On the page listing the letters, it would be better to list them according to year written (again, like The Letters). --Morgan 23:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

New page name

As I suggested before, "Unpublished" isn't a good description for this collection of letters. I'll redirect/rename the page to "Rare Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien" (unless anyone has a better suggestion). --Morgan 5 Mars 2010

I'd go with a safer "Letters not published in "The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien"", or something. -- Ederchil ^{(Talk/Contribs/Edits)} 16:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

True (although I find that page name a bit cumbersome). In the future, perhaps we should rethink the whole section on letters. What is interesting is the actual "item", the letter in itself (which could find publication in various different forms). -- User:Morgan/sig