I salvaged some non-trivial examples from an recent version of fanon article. Since we have already other debates liked "mistakes in Tolkien's works", we can tolerate this article too. This I consider also useful because I have also fallen victim to such misconceptions. Sage 20:46, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. I simply removed all of it from fanon for the sake of ease. An article is good (maybe rename it though to have some consistency.
- I think if this article gets a bit more polished, it might be useful to link to this on the main page.
- Happy new year, Ederchil~& Sage. Grond 22:39, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe we can add also something about Lurtz, Orodreth and Gil-Galad ancestery...and uhm...the location of Dorwinion.
Midden-Aarde Essays (a book of essays from Tolkien's work, made by a friend of my, what he is soon gonna publish in Dutch) says something about that in the chapter "Mysteries van de Hobbit, Dorwinion" ("Engimas of the Hobbit, Dorwinion") --Amroth 15:54, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, Dorwinion's location is not really a mystery - Tolkien placed it on the Western bank of the Sea of Rhûn. How is Lurtz a misconception? -- Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 16:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- This comes from the chapter "Dorwinion":
Uit de tekst van ‘De Hobbit’ is dan ook niet te achterhalen waar Dorwinion juist lag en wie er woonde. Desondanks is de ligging van het land op een andere manier duidelijk geworden. Pauline Baynes, de favoriete illustrator van Tolkien , zette Dorwinion in 1969 op de landkaart. Ze plaatste het land aan de monding van de Running, aan de noordwestelijke oevers van de Zee van Rhûn (zie kaart).
Hoewel Tolkien bezwaar had tegen sommige andere plaatsen die Pauline Baynes op de kaart gezet had, verklaarde hij zich wel akkoord met de ligging van Dorwinion. En ondanks het feit dat de Zee van Rhûn niet de locatie was die Tolkien oorspronkelijk in gedachten had, is het land sindsdien wel op die plaats blijven liggen. Christopher Tolkien merkt hetzelfde op in ‘The Lays of Beleriand’:
“Dorwinion is marked on the decorated map by Pauline Baynes, as a region on the North-western shores of the Sea of Rhun. It must be presumed that this, like other names on that map, was communicated to her by my father, but its placing seems surprising.”
--Amroth 16:12, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- Dorwinion dan maar wel. Maar Lurtz komt alleen maar uit de film. -- Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 16:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Going through the different "misconceptions":
- Definition of First Age; Third Age "of the Sun": keep.
- The Arkenstone was a Silmaril: keep
- Elrond visits Elros in Númenor: what part of the text implies such a thing? With the current wording it seems the "misconception" is created to highlight a trivial abandoned concept.
- Arwen, the lastborn of the Elves: keep. It was portrayed sort of like that in the movies
- Legolas's age: omit, already at Legolas
- Legolas hair color: see previous
- Names of the Nazgûl: remove or rewrite
- A female Nazgûl: remove or merge with 7.
- Mrs. Thranduil: there are so many characters whose mother's name is unknown, it's pointless to single out Legolas. Also, if this stays, can we at least tell the reader what the name is?
- The War in the North: pointless. Maybe inspired by BfMeII, but I'm pretty sure the promotional material for the game explicitly mentioned it was fiction.
- The shape of Middle-earth: we can keep this, but with a rewrite
- Pointed ears: why is it under misconceptions if it's pointed out (npi) that it's true?
- Hobbit feet: huge? rephrase
- Déagol/Sméagol relationship: keep. Maybe also point out that they weren't Hobbits, but ancestors of Hobbits.
- Gollum's age: pointless. Nothing in the text suggests such a thing.
- Tengwar on Sting: pointless. We might change this to "Bilbo named Sting when he found it", because that's what happened in the RB movie, the 2003 game and I believe the radio plays too.
- Saruman, the creator of Uruk-hai: rewrite.
- Dorwinion: keep
- Add: in light of Last Waterbender's recent edit to Bregalad, we should also explain here that "beam" means "tree" here (cf. German baum, Dutch boom, Frisian beam), not "a beam of light", and note something about translators messing up (Schuchart, for one, did).
- As I agree that most of your points are not really misconceptions, I removed some of them (and left others). I also removed the "shape of middle-earth" thing since it doesn't seem as a misconception to me. The map was drawn by Tolkien; it is not said that it was replaced by another map; nor it is contradicted by the Silmarillion. I also collected some more from other articles. Sage 08:45, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 Legolas' hair?
The article: "However, in The Fellowship of the Ring it is stated that Legolas' hair was "dark", and dark brown or black hair was most common among the Sindar."
- Is it so? Here I would like to see the sources, so that the misconceptions would not be replaced by other misconceptions. What it comes to Legolas' dark hair, I suppose the source in the Fellowship is this: "His head was dark, crowned with sharp white stars that glittered in the black pools of the sky behind." (J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings, The Fellowship of the Ring, "The Great River"). But does this really tell anything about the colour of his hair or even of his skin? I suppose that we can only say, that when Frodo saw Legolas standing above him, the figure of the Elf was dark against the sky. – The source for the dark hair among the Sindar in general would also be nice to have. --Tik 11:47, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
I'd suggest taking out the reference to Buckland or changing it. Early editions stated explicitly that Buckland was added to the Shire, and I'm not sure it's clear that the change in recent editions is the one Tolkien would have made, so I wouldn't call it a misconception. Spearwielder 20:15, 2 January 2017 (UTC)