- Yes. And before you start asking, Finduilas of Nargothrond too. -- Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 20:10, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 Silmarillion vs. Late notes
Why was my revision, which placed the genealogy from Silmarillion above the later one, removed? There was nothing factually wrong in it. And it's completely arbitrary to use as main source the later notes, giving a version of the story that wasn't introduced in any narrative and it's pretty much obscure. Not to mention the confusion for readers. Following the same logic, you should change as well the article about Finrod Felagund and state that he was married, because that's what the last notes on the matter say (HoME vol. XII: "On Dwarves and Men", "The Shibboleth of Fëanor"), even when this contradicts everything that is said in the main narratives. The question is, why is given preference to quickly written notes (that we don't even know if were definitive or not) over the big bulk of narratives that is extant? That would require that all references to the making of the Sun and the Moon are removed as well from the articles, because that's what the last notes on the matter say. But what's the point of talking about the stories that "could" have been, but never were? We would be talking about a fictional book that was never written. —Unsigned comment by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs).
- It was reverted because the intro that does not comply with the Manual of Style. That you left a link to "Elf (Middle-earth)" in there is a dead giveaway you just copied if off wikipedia . Also, no not mess with headers. It may need a rewrite to comply with our new ideas towards canon, but that doesn't mean we have to accept everything that's added. --Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 17:38, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
No, it wasn't just "copied off" from Wikipedia. It was me the one who edited the Wikipedia article, following some complaints precisely about this issue in that page. In fact, the original article in this page was an obvious copy of the original article in Wikipedia, that followed all that "Orodreth son of Angrod" version, so that's not an excuse. And what has to do the style with the content? Just because there's a wrong link doesn't mean that the content is wrong. —Unsigned comment by 184.108.40.206 (talk • contribs).
- Even if you wrote the text on wikipedia, it's still not okay to just paste it here without bothering about markup. We have entirely different ways of linking, different headers, different rules concerning in-universe writing, different templates.
- Admittedly, a lot of stuff was copied in the early days. Not all of it has been cleaned up. But that doesn't mean content should still be copied. --Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 18:58, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 Orodreth's Quenya names
The article says that the Quenya name of Orodreth in the published Silmarillion is Artanáro. However, I can't find that name being mentioned in the book. Where is it? Besides, if the last Quenya name proposed by Tolkien was Artaher (with Artaresto being just a passing variation), shouldn't be Artaher the name that appears in the infobox and main text?--220.127.116.11 17:05, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
- The name Artanáro is not mentioned in the published Silmarillion. In the appendix "Elements in Quenya and Sindarin Names" there are mentioned Fëanáro and Aikanáro (plus Findaráto and Angaráto) but not Artanáro. The development of the name and also of the descendance of the person itself is quite complicated, and I think it should be addressed more profoundly, noticing clearly the differences between the story taken into the published Silmarillion by CJRT (known to the majority of the readers) and the further development of the story only found in the pages of the HoME, leading from Artanáro (also one of the possible names of Gil-galad) to Artaresto/Rodreth/Orodreth to Artaher/Arothir, and from being the son of Finarfin to being the son of Angrod. --Tik 15:54, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
- Then, if Artanáro is never mentioned in The Silmarillion, the line that says so is misleading. In my opinion, the development of the genealogy of Orodreth and Gil-galad is clear enough already. What seems confusing are the Quenya names: first Artanáro, then Artaresto and finally Artaher. Maybe it would be good to cite all three names in one of the sub-sections to see the development of the character, but leave the last one (Artaher) for the introduction and infobox. The Sindarin names are probably less confusing; the article says that, even if Tolkien proposed the Sindarin name Arothir later, is likely that "Orodreth" would have been kept as the main name.--18.104.22.168 19:47, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 Would you mind...
Would you mind if I added Orodreth's Silmarillion history, parantage, and siblings to those already entered? It would reduce the confusion any Silmarillion only readers might feel at the difference in what they have read and what is listed as fact...It even gave me a turn until I did some digging in the History volumes, and I am a well-established Tolkienian, so I can't imagine the bewilderment of a Middle Earth newbie at seeing something so different from what he has read...unless he has read the ten volumes of History already, in which case he shouldn't be needing to look on Wikipedia at all :) I don't even fully understand the reasoning behind including the "new" parentage of Orodreth at all: it matches up with nothing else in any of the Legendarium, and was clearly an afterthought of Tolkien's considering the unbalanced significance of Orodreth as a son of Finarfin and his lack of action in the text. Is it even necessary at all to include it? If it is, then I will leave it alone and simply add the additional information. Naeramarth 04:02, 27 August 2018 (UTC)