Tolkien Gateway

Template talk:Valardwellings

The valar template (Template:Valar infobox) featured on each of the valar features a section for "Dwelling". Of those locations I've included right now in the Template:Valardwellings, the following are "canon" (i.e., appear in The Silmarillion and in later manuscripts in The History of M-e series):

  • Halls of Aulë
  • Halls of Mandos
  • Halls of Manwë and Varda
  • House of Oromë

The following only appear in early (disputed or non-canon) manuscripts:

  • House of Tulkas
  • Ulmonan

Now, my question is: can we put all of these (also the "non-canon" ones) in the dwelling section of the vala template? Or should the non-canon ones rather appear under a "Other version (of the legendarium)"? --Morgan 19:31, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I think we should remove the non-canon dwelling but add Almaren. --Amroth 10:04, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
I think House of Tulkas and Ulmonan can stay on this template, but I don't think they should be listed under "Dwelling" in the infoboxes of Tulkas and Ulmo (but they should be mentioned in the "Other version of the legendarium" section). I'm not so sure about including Almaren; it was not a dwelling of one specific vala, and if we're to include Almaren then, by the same logic, we should include Valinor.-- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  12:48, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
I would leave House of Tulkas and Ulmonan in (maybe add a "* disputed canonicity"?). I would also add Lórien to it. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 14:25, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I also believe that including Almaren is not really necessary in this template, since the purpose of the template is to collect the individual dwellings (houses, halls, gardens, etc) of the Valar.--Morgan 15:43, 17 November 2011 (UTC)