Tolkien Gateway

Tolkien Gateway:Featured articles/Archive

(Difference between revisions)
m (Tweaked)
Line 1: Line 1:
:''This page lists former, the current, [[Tolkien Gateway:Featured articles|featured article]]. Do not edit this page.''
:''This page lists former, the current, [[Tolkien Gateway:Featured articles|featured article]]. Do not edit this page.''

Revision as of 13:35, 23 August 2014

This page lists former, the current, featured article. Do not edit this page.



Aragorn II

1 June 2008 - 9 April 2009

This is a historic moment on the TG Wiki. It's my honor to nominate Aragorn II for featured status. We probably need to clearly state what the rules are for this procedure. I assume that it will be similar to other Wikis, with in place voting over some reasonable time period. Hyarion, help us out here. --Theoden1 19:06, 12 May 2008 (EDT)
  • I agree, this would make a great Featured Article, it has multiple images from multiple reputable artists, sound bytes, detailed history, both in the legendarium as well as portrayal in the film adaptations.--Quidon88 22:33, 12 May 2008 (EDT)
  • I agree too. But "Personality" and "Portrayal in adaptations" need some work. I'll do Portrayal. -- Ederchil 03:27, 13 May 2008 (EDT)
  • I agree. I don't see why not. -- Borondir 22:00, 28 May 2008 (EDT)
  • I agree. I think it is a wonderful article and should be the featured article because it was made accurately and with much thought. Not only that but who better to have the featured article on than the King of Gondor and Arnor.--High King Fingolfin 7:14, 31 May 2008 (EDT)
  • I agree. I'm still not sold on the quality of it, as it still needs a lot of improvement. However it is about time for a new FA and Aragorn II is certainly one of our better ones. --Hyarion 03:05, 1 June 2008 (EDT)

Witch-king of Angmar

9 April 2009 - 6 December 2009

This article was brought to my attention, and it turned out to be surprisingly strong. It has good segmentation, well-illustrated, good references, with a strong section on portrayals. It would make a very strong addition to our new FA collection.--Theoden1 19:43, 4 June 2008 (EDT)
  • I whole-heartedly agree. This is a very long article which buckets of information and I think really shows us our ability to make long, detailed, accurate and engaging articles. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 11:50, 24 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree. I go along with both of you and think that it would be a perfect "Featured Article" due to its richment of details, good illustration and good style. -- Eldarion Telcontar 05:19, 25 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree. I think more people should read it and as the "Featured Article" many would do it. loved to read it. -- Bombur Ironfoot 15:04; 27 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree, though about everything I want to say about it has been said already, I chose this one over Gandalf because as has been stated, that article has already been a featured article.--Quidon88 13:11, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree. I do think that this article is very well made because it is very well constructed. Also, even though it is a plethora of information it is well ordered. Overall it is a wonderful choice for the featured article.--High King Fingolfin 8:25, 12 July 2008 (EDT)


6 December 2009 - 28 February 2011

I know it's scandalous, ego-pleasing self promotion, but I personally think my preci... Glamdring article would make a great Featured Article. -- Ederchil 16:13, 29 May 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree. It is an impressive article for a weapon, with complete information, both from inside and outside the imaginary world, which gives the reader a more complete image. Great references section! The pleasant writing style is on the plus side as well. ~~ Þelma 15:55, 28 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree. It is well cited. For that alone goes my vote. ~~ nikolet 03:33, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree. I am astounded by this article's consistence and reference. Such excellence deserves to be featured.--Ingwe
  • Agree. Great article presenting all the facts and assumptions about the sword. A very thorough and nevertheless entertaining article. --Eldarion Telcontar 18:59, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Agree. Exellent article seperating facts and assumptions about the sword and presenting it in very fine detail.--Galdor of the Trees 18:03, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Agree. Huge amounts of images, sources, refrences, and information. This deserves to be FA material.--Galdor of the Havens 18:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


28 February 2011 - 24 June 2011

Don't need to say much about Eriador, perfect example of good article. --Morgan 21:17, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


24 June 2011 - present

This article has developed pretty decently (kudos to User:KingAragorn for tracking all those refs!). Has it reached a FA status yet? --Morgan 21:27, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Agree - (once the original research issue is resolved). --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 19:21, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Agree --Amroth 13:27, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Agree - though if I have any fault with it, it's that the Etymology section is a bit hollow. It's three sentences, three lines, three sources. It doesn't really form one whole. -- Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 13:46, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
    • Yes, I agree about the Etymology section. I added something from The Ring of Words, which "fleshes" out the first paragraph a bit. The Trāgu stuff is still a bit apart, and I was thinking of adding something along the lines of "While Smaug is the name recorded in the Red Book of Westmarch, the dragon's original name in the language of Dale was Trāgu.", but I'm afraid it would close to over-interpretation..?--Morgan 19:16, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Since Smaug has enough votes, shouldn't it be featured? --Amroth 14:31, 6 June 2011 (UTC)