Tolkien Gateway


Isn't this article a bit unnecessary? ~ Earendilyon 04:10, 31 December 2007 (EST)

I'd say so, along with a good number of other ones in Category:Animals. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 09:37, 31 December 2007 (EST)
Agreed entirely. I think for our purposes, we only need list creatures unique to Middle-earth. That said, certain animals have certain significances within the tales so perhaps a single article: Middle-earth Fauna would be the best option? Dr Death 06:45, 1 January 2008 (EST)
Well, I don't agree! I think there's a lot which can be said about many of the "minor" creatures, especially if we add stuff to the "Portrayal in adaptions"-sections (which would clutter up a general article on Middle-Earth Fauna).--Morgan 22:46, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Agreed, as long as they are mentioned in Tolkien's works (or adaptations) they should have a place on TG.-- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  00:34, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Suggestion: For creatures that are only mentioned very briefly (such that clearly are the same in the "real" world, and/or are only mentioned in linguistic works), I guess it would suffice with a mention in a general fauna list (I've started working on such a list in a sandbox article). But for (as Dr Death says) creatures that have "certain significances within the tales", even minor ones, I'm in favour of individual articles.--Morgan 00:58, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
I created a tentative article/list called Fauna of Arda. Any ideas are appreciated. --Morgan 16:52, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
+1 for animal articles. --Amroth 17:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)