Merge?
Should this page and the other Dale page be merged? I feel like it'll serve a better purpose as being 1 page with all the information in one page. Besides, the location is always refeered to as being just "Dale" and never the "Kingdom of Dale". The only difference is that earlier they were ruled by the "Lord of Dale" and later the "King of Dale". What do y'all think?--Kulid123 18:05, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- That's good. I'll get right to it.--Kulid123 19:48, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Well, let's see if anyone else has a contrary opinion first. There's no rush. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 19:56, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oh damn, I already did it. If you wanna undo it go ahead. My bad. Only saw this after.--Kulid123 21:23, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- The way I see it, I don't think it should be merged because both articles have different purposes as it says in the disambiguation on the top one talks about the city and one talks about the political entity. I see it like Venice and Republic of Venice if that makes sense. Gaetano 00:46, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
- Right...but the thing is, it never existed as a kingdom; its rulers merely ruled over one political entity with two different titles. Besides, the histories of both articles were anyways identical. It is reduntant to keep both. All the political history is anyways included on that article. Also, the cultural history should be in the article for the "Men of Dale". Just a thought.--Kulid123 03:44, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
- If the entities are different, I would support two different articles, but cleaned up so that they don't repeat the same information. But I always thought that the post-Bard Dale was a kingdom that included a wider area (including the town proper) ruled by a King, not a Lord. PS. I agree that the culture section belongs to the Men of Dale article. Sage 09:55, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
- The article already acknowledges that it didn't exist as a kingdom in the time of Girion, it refers it as township. I also agree with your last point. Gaetano 13:28, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
- Would a move to the page "Dale (Kingdom)" solve this problem without having to merge the two pages together? Also, due to the limited information on the "King of Dale" page, would it be suitable to merge the info to this page? Thoughts on this?--Tengwar 13:04, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- I support renaming it to "Dale (Kingdom)" but merging the King of Dale info to this page is redundant considering it is a title used for more than one person. The renaming would solve both problems.--Tolkienator 17:18, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think that they should be merged as Dale is referred to here only the town but the Kingdom of Dale extended far south and east of Lake-town, all the way to the River Carnen.--Shivam 08:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
(reset indentation)
I agree that the Dale page and the Dale (Kingdom) page should be merged so that only a page called Dale remains. In my opinion, there is no extra value in having a separate Dale (Kingdom) page, because the content of both pages will be virtually identical. The only information about the realm of Dale we have that does not cover the town or the area of the later town is that the realm of Dale extended south and east of Lake-town at the end of the Third Age at the time of King Brand and that the enemies that threatened the borders later crossed the Carnen and drove back the forces of Dale. By the way, it is not known if the eastern border of the realm of Dale was the river Carnen.--Akhôrahil (talk) 09:12, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- I also think that the two pages should be merged into one.Dour1234 (talk) 11:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- To copy/paste my comment from Discord:
- "I fail to see much reason why 'Dale' and 'Kingdom of Dale' should be separate articles. Best reason I can think of is that 'Dale' should only refer to the city, while 'Kingdom of Dale' should refer to Dale in the broader sense of a wider region (think 'Venice the city' vs 'Venice the republic').
- Even so, for practical reasons I'm 100% for the merge." IvarTheBoneless (talk) 16:32, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- Tolkien never used the term “Kingdom of Dale”. He only ever used the term “Dale” to in reference to both the town and the realm. Tolkien uses the term “Dale” for both even in earlier drafts of The Lord of the Rings. It is only in early drafts of The Hobbit where the term "Ruins of Dale Town" appears in reference to the town. But it is pretty clear that this term was sadly abandoned by Tolkien since he never used it again.
- In the fourth section of the Prologue, there is the following curious line:
- ”
With them he set out, to his own lasting astonishment, on a morning of April, it being then the year 1341 Shire-reckoning, on a quest of great treasure, the dwarf-hoards of the Kings under the Mountain, beneath Erebor in Dale, far off in the East
- From this, it is implied either that the term “Dale” also was used for the general region or that the realm existed in some insignificant form before Smaug attacked. Otherwise, how could Erebor be in Dale when the town and realm are said in the index entry for "Dale" in Unfinished Tales to lie around it? Regardless of the case, I still believe that the two pages should be merged into one page covering the town, the realm, and the region.Dour1234 (talk) 18:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- I also agree the pages should be merged. --Mord 03:59, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
- From this, it is implied either that the term “Dale” also was used for the general region or that the realm existed in some insignificant form before Smaug attacked. Otherwise, how could Erebor be in Dale when the town and realm are said in the index entry for "Dale" in Unfinished Tales to lie around it? Regardless of the case, I still believe that the two pages should be merged into one page covering the town, the realm, and the region.Dour1234 (talk) 18:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)