Tolkien Gateway

User talk:Transcendent28

[edit] Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Tolkien Gateway. I hope you like the place and choose to join our work. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and we look forward to your future edits. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Council forums or ask me on my talk page. Keep up the great work!

-- User:Hyarion 03:21, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Orcs

I thought I made it very clear in the edit summary why I reverted your edit on Orcs. It's copied from wikipedia. Yet you re-add it without stating a reason. Only add text you write yourself. You can use wikipedia as a basis, but we have a different Manual of Style, and more precise referencing. --Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 17:58, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

That info on Orc origins from wikipedia was written by me. I think it gives a much better overall account of the various theories which Tolkien had over his life as to the origin of the orcs. I have included suitable quotes so I don't understand your reasons for removing it all and replacing it with an inferior description of orc origins. You make all the sense of a bottled sausage. Unsigned comment by Transcendent28 (talk • contribs).
  1. Copying itself. We've had issues with copying from other sites in the past, and more or less decided not to do it anymore, at all. The origins section may very well have been an outdated wikipedia copy in the first place.
  2. Sourcing. Excuse me, but for this wiki, citing "The Silmarillion" is not enough. We have templates.
  3. Layout. You don't need lots of blockquotes. They make reading a text extremely unpleasant. Instead, just paraphrase and give the source. Also, why do you remove section headers? Wouldn't it make much more sense if you kept them, if only for naviagtional purposes?
The origins section should definitely be expanded. However, it'd have to comply with our Manual of Style. You can't just dump stuff here and expect us to clean it up for you. --Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 19:44, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I know jack all about templates and things and don't really have the time to mess with it, but I still think my info is far better sourced and informative than the guff which is currently sitting in the origins section. I think the block quotes are needed to give full context of the statement which is being made, as evidence of the theory Tolkien had at the time. Why not tidy it up for me? You seem to spend enough of your waking hours deleting my information, why not simply be helpful and tidy it up. Thanks. Unsigned comment by Transcendent28 (talk • contribs).
I would heed Ederchil's words. But let's not get too worked up over this! The only thing that makes as much sense as "bottled sausage" is an edit war; discussion is far more productive! -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  19:58, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
War is an upsetting but necessary part of life in middle-earth, in order to purge the evil bottled sausage and his vile underlings "The packets of beer" from our once sane lands and return to an oasis of clear thought once again. Unsigned comment by Transcendent28 (talk • contribs).
OK. But please stop. I should warn you that if you continue to pursue this edit war then it could result in your account been banned. -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  20:15, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Well it just means that Wikipedia is a better source of info on Tolkien's orcs than this, supposedly Tolkien dedicated wiki. Very sad that you want to remove perfectly good information and use a shadow of the full truth instead. Unsigned comment by Transcendent28 (talk • contribs).
It's not perfectly good. If it were perfectly good, it'd be properly sourced, for one. --Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 20:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
The quotes are sourced! far better than the original stuff anyway. Why not remove that as well? You obviously care a lot more about your own ego trip and banning abilities than about collating information on Tolkien's universe. Unsigned comment by Transcendent28 (talk • contribs).
Contrary to my advice, you're getting worked up over this. You obviously do have the time to read our Manual of Style, so please do. And if you want to expand our articles (which we more than welcome) then please follow our standards. See Smaug as an example of a good, well referenced article. If you want help on how to properly reference, then just ask! Believe it or not, we're happy to help! (Incidentally, I personally have no banning capabilities.) -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  20:42, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
You still didn't answer my question of why you don't delete the other stuff as well? If I reference my quotes to actual page numbers, will I be able to keep it on here? Unsigned comment by Transcendent28 (talk • contribs).
Because the article in its current form was put together at a time when we didn't have such high standards. Back then it was more quantity rather than quality; nowadays it's the other way around. We aim to produce a high quality encyclopaedia with excellent articles. Replacing work of a low standard with work of a low standard will get us nowhere. In answer to your question, yes we can accommodate your work if it's referenced. Use the "<ref></ref>" tags to insert a reference using the appropriate templates. For example: "<ref>{{H|1}}</ref>". -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  21:04, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Hmm. I see your point ...slightly. This is however far more than I can be bothered learning, it took me long enough to learn Wikipedia editing. I just think that content is better than style. I could quickly give page numbers for all the quotes I use, but I'm not messing about with pasting templates about or my mind will turn to porridge. I don't see why others, more dedicated than I, couldn't just edit my stuff and make it fit your style, templates and inside leg measurements, but anyway. As an obvious fan of the orcs I feel frustrated that this important info on the back story of the Orcs isn't included in this wiki. It is however your loss I think. I will just point people to the messy but far more accurate Wikipedia article for Orc related goodness (or is that badness?). Unsigned comment by Transcendent28 (talk • contribs).
It's a lot of information to go through and tidy up; that becomes especially tedious when you haven't written the work yourself. I don't think Ederchil or myself are willing to tidy it up for you. If you ask Morgan nicely he might do it, but I don't know. You're right that we should have this information. I just think that learning how to reference isn't too soul-destroying! I mean, you must know where the information comes from already. All you have to do is learn how to use wiki reference syntax (the same is used on Wikipedia). I just want to encourage you to finish your own work. -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  21:49, 8 October 2011 (UTC)