User talk:LorenzoCB

From Tolkien Gateway


Hello Lorenzo Carrera, 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, join our chat or ask me on my talk page. Keep up the great work!

-- Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 18:43, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


Thanks for your recent contributions, LorenzoCB! When you write at talk pages, please make sure to sign your posts with --~~~~, which will automatically show a link to your user name and date/time when writing the post.

--Morgan 22:15, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Middle-earτh Shadow of War[edit]

Hello. Can you upload at least one image related to the videogame Middle-earth Shadow of War?I don't have the ability to upload images on Tolkien Gateway but you do have this ability.

Hi! I recommend you to make your own account, then you can write all the article about Middle-earth: Shadow of War, as it is almost empty and you seem to be very interested on it. When you get 50 editions you'll be able to upload images. Now please, stop spamming about that. I won't do it, I personally don't like those games.--LorenzoCB 14:40, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I would like to upload an image on page Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor but I can't upload images on Tolkien Gateway. Can you upload this image that I have uploaded on the specific page.

There you have it :) You need 50 edits to upload images, btw. Hope you can get them improving the game articles. --LorenzoCB 22:11, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Dagor Dagorath[edit]

Hi LorenzoCB, great job on your rewriting of the Dagor Dagorath article! Also, thank you for the kind corrections of my woeful ignorance of early names for characters in the Legendarium. Oops. :) --Holdwine Meriadoc (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 18:26, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

It was just a detail. Thank you for correcting my English, I couldn't imagine I made so many grammatical mistakes! --LorenzoCB 23:03, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Your English is a lot better than my Spanish :) And I'm just picky when it comes to grammar! --Holdwine Meriadoc (Talk/Contribs/Edits)


Can you help me fix what I have done on page Isildur because I don't know what to do.

I didn't see many problems. I fixed the style. Btw, I added the cover of Shadows of War. Last time I confused the games and uploaded the one for Shadows of Mordor :P Remember to sign when you write in a talkpage. --LorenzoCB 17:09, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Image categories[edit]

Hi there. I don't know if you've noticed but there has been a convention (which isn't fully realised but increasingly I have slowly implemented) that for image categories the order has been 1) Artist 2) Where it's from 3) what/who it is depicting and these should be listed in alphabetical order (see File:Alan Lee - The Elvenking's Gate.jpg as an example). If you could keep this in mind when changing or adding categories that would be appreciated. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 07:36, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for explaining that. I was trying to include the categories in alphabetical order, as I didn't relize there was a formal style for that. I'll do as you say. --LorenzoCB 11:53, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
Sure, although this one and this one weren't in alphabetical order. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 12:03, 5 September 2019 (UTC)


Hi. Just a note to remind you that, as per the usage information on Template:Webcite, the "accessed" field is not optional; you should use this to show the date you accessed the page. Thanks! --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 12:08, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

As the date showed up authomatically I wasn't including it the last times, but now I see that it was just some kind of preview. Thanks for pointing it out. --LorenzoCB 12:19, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Lost Tales[edit]

Hi Lorenzo, I appreciate much your work on expanding the pages on HoMe.

Sometimes I have been thinking if we should dedicate some virtual "space" of this wiki for the Lost Tales continuity, I mean we already have LT-related articles like Gruir, Gilfanon, Noldoli, Inglor and so on. However for topics that are covered in published canon, we use the "Other version of the Legendarium" section, see for example Tol_Eressea#Other_versions_of_the_Legendarium or Mandos#Other_versions_of_the_Legendarium. But I believe there is much more that deserves to be told about the LT topics. So I had the thought about creating alternate pages dedicated to the "alternate" versions of those topics, something like Tol Eressea (Lost Tales). Perhaps we should also include them in categories like "Lost Tales characters" or "Lost Tales locations" and even have some template on the top of each article that notifies we are talking about the "Lost Tales continuity", instead of the generic one about Tolkien's early, unfinished and best thoughts. So we can have a fully functional sub-wiki within the wiki covering the LT topics in a clean way. Similar to how Wookieepedia handles the Canon and the Legends articles.

These are my first thoughts, and I'd like to know your thoughts, before opening a forum topic. Sage 23:44, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sage! Actually, I hate templates on the top of articles (because of how they look), but yours seems a good idea. It could help to clean the sections of OVOTL, that sometimes are a messy hotchpotch. However, I would wait until we have completed at least all the chapter summaries. The LT are a difficult topic, as there is not really a continuity (for example, I personally think that Christopher should have published the Part Two first), so I think it would be better to have a good base before clasifying things. And yes, I have planned to make those summaries at some point, don't know when.
Happy new year. --LorenzoCB 00:28, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello again. Please have a look at the article Chasm of Ilmen and tell me if we can identify which is the particular earlier (1931) and later (1951) Silmarillion CT says about. Obviously he refers to the Quenta Noldorinwa and the Later Quenta? Or perhaps one of them is the Quenta of the Lost Road? I am not very comfortable with the versions and the dates. Sage 17:43, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello. It took me a while to find the page, you should try to include them more often (if you have the book on hand, of course). Yes, "the 'Silmarillion' that followed Q" (1937) is the Quenta Silmarillion (Lost Road) (he cites LR p.242), while the text used in the 77's Silmarillion is Annals of Aman §177 (1951). --LorenzoCB 19:06, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for fixing my error on Christopher’s death date, LorenzoCB! I originally did have it as 16 January, but then I saw it as 15 January and thought it was an incorrect time conversion on my part. Whoops! — Holdwine Meriadoc (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 23:15, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Don't worry. That error has been giving problems in Wikipedia, as many newspapers were giving it mistakenly, and seems like the own Tolkien Family asked to some Tolkien Societies to clarify it.--LorenzoCB 10:36, 21 January 2020 (UTC)


The foaloke is a type of dragon distinct from the Uruloke, it shouldn't be discussed in the same article. I think all relevant information should be contained in its distinct article. Sage 17:26, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Foa was changed to mean "breath", but it doesn't specify if it is because a foaloke "breathes fire" (being then an uruloke), which is the most obvious deduction, as a dragon that just breathes has nothing in particular. However, I agree with having a separated article, but you should make it starting from foa as "breath", not "hoard". In OVOTL could be included the description of Glorund as a foaloke. --LorenzoCB 19:04, 13 February 2020 (UTC)


Firstly, I am not explaining Sauron's origins, but why he fell. Introductions should never be blunt. The sections expand the content of briefly presented in the introduction.

Secondly, the quote I put is from The Silmarillion - Valaquenta: Of the Enemies. Take a look if you will, I believe it is the last sentence in the paragraph concerning Sauron. --LordoftheEarth 12:51, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah, as you removed all my edit, I didn't see you later put the quote that there was in the first place. If you want to help the wiki, there are many things that need to be improved: Tolkien Gateway:To-do. But the Sauron article is one of the few that are pretty fine, that's why I'm concerned with it.--LorenzoCB 12:59, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry if I myself am not that receptive or even annoying at times ... I'm having a bad time ... broke up with a girl and all that ... Let's leave the Sauron article as it is for now. I added on the talk page that I changed the image so if someone thinks it doesn't work then we'll change it. I'll try to help out on other articles as well, of course. I appreciate your dedication to the wiki! A nice time till next time! --LordoftheEarth 13:07, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for being harsh when I point out the mistakes in your Talkpage. I get nervous when people make many edits for just one article, but I should have been more polite. --LorenzoCB 16:11, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

I would like to point out that I disagree with the choices of the new pics. However I would like to say that some of the recent edits were legit and shouldn't be reverted. When a user makes a lot of edits and another user doesn't agree with stylistic mistakes, they shouldn't revert all the edits, but rather fix the particular points. Sage 17:10, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Melkor's Messenger[edit]

I edited out Sauron and Ungoliant of the Servants of Melkor category, the reasons why are faily logical. Leaving these aside, does it say anyway if Melkor's messenger, Langon, in the Book of Lost Tales is an Ainu? I saw he is mentioned as such in the Allies and Servants of Morgoth section and I don't remember J.R.R. saying anything on Langon's nature. This is all I found on this emissary: "Melko heard him and was in doubt, he would not come, but sent Langon his servant..."--LordoftheEarth 12:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with removing that category from Sauron. He was his servant for a whole age. He can also have the category of 'Evil' because he later became independent, but he was a true servant, it doesn't matter if he forsook Morgoth; unlike Ungoliant, who was never under Morgoth's command. I fixed the info of Langon, thanks for pointing that out. But there are better things than caring for the categories.--LorenzoCB 13:49, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Lost Tales[edit]

Can you give me an example about that Gnomes category? For example, we should add this to the articles about Feanor and Beren ? Sage 18:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I mean for those characters that didn't have a development beyond the "Gnome" phase, like Gilfanon, Littleheart... If in the future we make articles for Beren the Gnome and others, that category would be applied. But now those examples are categorized as "Noldor", anachronically. (You can answer me in your talkpage, btw). --LorenzoCB 19:37, 14 June 2020 (UTC)


Please have a look at Talk:Oropher. There is a passage that has been overlooked. I think the page about Oropher itself, as well as topics about the Elves of Lindon, the Sindar etc have some mistakes concerning their migrations. Sage 10:46, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Answered, I hope I helped. Do you take care of the matter? --LorenzoCB 13:39, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Eduardo Segura[edit]

Hey why did you remove the information and link from the article without an explanation?

And why do you plan leaving here? That was lathspel. Sage 18:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Eduardo did work as a consultant for the movies, but he told me he had no impact, so it was not pertinent to include that info. He also asked me to remove that link, as he lost his web domain. Sorry, I should have indicated that, but as I am the only one involved with that article I didn't bother.
I'm leaving because the wiki requires time, and I want to focus more on other projects and on my spiritual life. Also, I feel many things are gonna change soon and I don't think I'll be able to edit. But I'm still around here, I want to finish some things before. --LorenzoCB 19:00, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Image of Tevildo[edit]

I was just wondering, where did you get that image (I know it's from "Beren and Lúthien", but where, specifically, did you find it on the internet)?

Also, where did you find the title of the image? --IvarTheBoneless

I found it on the internet, yes, Pinterest or something. I just searched one with a good quality and then I removed the frame following the policy of the wiki. Usually the images of Alan Lee have the title of the chapter from where they come, but there is no rule about that, so I put a more pertinent title. Are you sure we need a gallery for Beren and Lúthien? That imples uploading all its images... --LorenzoCB 12:17, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
Well, I'm planning to upload the entirety of Alan Lee's artwork from both "Beren and Lúthien" as well as those from "The Fall of Gondolin", yet I'm not sure on what should the appropriate title for those images should be.
For example, take a look at this image from "Beren and Lúthien". In the list of plates from the aforementioned book, this particular image is named "Surely that is a Silmaril that shines now in the West?". --IvarTheBoneless
Oh, if the images are titled in the book, then we should use those titles. I'll change the title of the one with Tevildo when I can check my book. --LorenzoCB 15:11, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Grammar on your user page[edit]

The past tense for the verb to teach in the third paragraph of your user page is wrong. You should write "Tolkien tought me ...". To teach is a verb with an irregular past tense. The past tense of teach is tought. I am not going to write anything in spanish here, but you are welcome to correct my spanish if I ever write anything in spanish. I picked up some spanish by listening to people and by reading the Diario de Cadiz during vacations in Spain (I have to admit that I had latin at school and french at school and at university, so I had some basis in roman languages to start from). My native language is german. I once read an article about books owned by J.R.R. Tolkien and was amazed to see that most of the books o that list were written in german. --Akhorahil 20:19, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Much appreciated! You can freely edit my Userpage if you want correct any grammar mistake. I'm searching now about it and the past tense of teach is actually taught: seems that tought is a common mistake, but thanks again for pointing out mine. About Tolkien's German books, Philology had had a strong development in Germany some time before Tolkien began college, so it was imperative for him to have those. --LorenzoCB 20:47, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
You are correct. The past tense of the verb teach is taught. Taught is one of the few words in english that end with aught. More words end with ought and are pronounced in the same way as words ending with aught. --Akhorahil 13:45, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Helge Fauskanger Optimal LOTR Prequel Movie[edit]

Have you ever read Helge's article about the Westernesse Movie? It would be cool, if Amazon Prime would read his article and adapt it like that.Unsigned comment by Akhorahil (talk • contribs).

Yes! I wish that too, it has very good ideas. But it is also too short, as it is only about Númenor, and Númenor only comes into the Second Age scenario after hundred of years. --LorenzoCB 18:24, 21 October 2020 (UTC)


First off, I just wanted to say thank you for all the work you've done on TG, it's always nice to see your username pop up under recent changes. I did want to mention clarily though, since I'm not entirely sure it's a word. I've seen you use it a few times, especially in etymology sections. It might just be a reoccurring typo; I think the word you're going for is "clearly". Sorry for being nitpicky, and for bugging you, I just wanted to let you know. --Grace18 02:11, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your words and correction. My English is still on work, so it is a relieve that we can count with users that take care of grammar. Feel free to correct my edits, I'll propably see it and learn from it. --LorenzoCB 09:13, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Names of Sauron[edit]

You can find the sources for the names and titles of Sauron that you asked for in the "Summary:" text box of your latest edit to the Sauron page on the Sauron page in the Origin section, in the Second Age section in the second paragraph, in the Black Years section in the last paragraph, in the On Númenor section in the second paragraph, in the The Necromancer section in the first paragraph, in the Etymology section and in the Other names and title section. If you have e-books of The Lord of the Rings and of the Silmarillion you can enter a name or title in the search field and look in which chapter or chapters on in which entry in the index it is included. --Akhorahil 14:43, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

I know the references of the Elvish names (I included most of them). I meant the names like 'Dark Power' , 'Black One', 'Black Hand', 'Nameless', which do not have any reference through the article or the Names section. I think I'm removing those until somebody provides proper references. The infobox is ridiculously long. --LorenzoCB 15:26, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Whatever. I'll try to find the references myself. --LorenzoCB 15:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
I can try to help pin some of them down. 'Black Hand' appears a couple pages into the "Of Túrin Turambar" chapter in the Silmarillion, although I can't tell if that refers to Morgoth or Sauron, I would have to reread the chapter. However, in The Two Towers, in The Black Gate is Closed, Gollum uses the name 'Black Hand' twice in reference to Sauron: "But master is going to take it to him, straight the the Black Hand" "He has only four [fingers] on the Black Hand". In Return of the King under The Pyre of Denethor, Gandalf twice refers to Sauron as the Dark Power, and the term is used later in the book. I'll work on some of the others, and try to add the references once I find them. Do the references just go in the infobox next to each name, and should all the names be references, even those that appear later in the article? --Grace18 16:06, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
That's useful, thanks! I'm making a proper list in the Names section, there we can include the references and explanation when necessary. We should avoid including references within the infobox, as it is suppoused to be a summary of the article (at least that's how I see it). --LorenzoCB 16:12, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Sounds good! Is there a list of names still missing their sources that I can work off of? I don't want to end up redoing work someone else has already done. Looking at the article right now, it's hard for me to see what is sourced and unsourced among the names. --Grace18 16:16, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
I claimed the article because this is a tough topic, now I'm checking articles about specific names of him. The names of the Valar are quite a mess, but looks like Aragorn and Morgoth are more urgent. You'll probably have to deal with names randomly separated in articles, which should be merged with the main article (or not if they are names shared by others). --LorenzoCB 17:06, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay. I will look into the Aragorn and Morgoth articles and see what I can do. By the way, you may already have this, but I did a bit more hunting around for the other names of Sauron you mentioned: 'Black One' is used by Gollum to refer to Sauron in The Two Towers under The Black Gate is Closed. 'Nameless One' is used by Faramir in The Two Towers under A Window on the West, and is later used by the men of Gondor in Return of the King under the Siege of Gondor. --Grace18 17:13, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
No, I haven't checked those yet, you saved me time, much appreciated. --LorenzoCB 18:12, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

First Age[edit]

Hey, which "single reference" are you referring to, and what is the "wiki's policy" concerning the "First Age of the Sun"? I am not aware of any such explicit policy and I think the "Ages of the Sun" is a fanon term (I looked for it in HoMe). Sage 09:47, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

As far as I know, the main reference to the "First Age" as the continuation of the Elder Days is the one from the Appendices that says the Exile of the Noldor happened at the end of the First Age. However, Tolkien, the wiki and the fandom use massively the term to refer to the dates after the rising of the Sun; it is not an explicit policy, but quite implicit. I said "First Age of the Sun" just to point out the difference between the different conceptions, I'm not proposing anything. There is a terminology hole and we should clarify that before mixing things around.--LorenzoCB 11:18, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
There is also a reference in HoMe that says that the First Age is much longer. Tolkien uses FA dates in the Grey Annals I think, but he doesn't equate FA 1 with solar year 1. This is a convention that began with Foster, which he admits is only a convention, and we follow it for better or worse, but no way it is a policy of the wiki, implicit or not, that we should consider everywhere in the articles that the First Age began in what Foster terms FA 1. Perhaps you might find some such references made years ago by other editors but it is not the first nor the last misconception that we detect in hindsight and we try to fix. On the contrary, that's what we should do. And yea, we follow fanon conventions when there is no better alternative, and when it is not contradicting the canon, but I think accepting "FA 1" as the beginning of the First Age within an article, is a mistake that perpetuates the misconception, and we have the option to avoid. I think removing or editing the First Age title in your list would do less "harm" than leaving it there. Sage 15:29, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Where in the whole HoMe? I don't deny the facts, tho, but we cannot follow a convention and fix misconceptions at the same time. This is more complex than I thought and I'm just wondering, but I think that if we want to keep consistency in the wiki (which I think is prioritary), we have two options:
  • To move the dates in Timeline/First Age to "Years of the Sun ##" or whatever proper term, and be sure that every mention to the "First Age" in the wiki corresponds to the same concept.
  • To keep Foster's terminology, and explain the problem in the First Age article (which already does, btw).
What we cannot do is saying "the Exile of the Noldor happened at the end of the First Age in the F.A. 1". --LorenzoCB 16:16, 25 February 2021 (UTC)


I noticed that other users have info boxes that seem to be unlisted in the userboxes page. Things like "whether or not you believe that Tom Bombadil is the father of nature." To be honest, I was a little envious, but I am also wondering if there is some error that might need to be called to attention. I could have asked Mith, but he doesn't respond as actively as I write, but also you have answered some of my other questions, so I am asking you. Thank you, --Erónèhire 04:22, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

I didn't notice that. You can always click on edit a Userpage and copy whatever you want. Here is it: . --LorenzoCB 08:20, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
I think they should all be in here: Category:Userbox templates. It's the category for the Userbox templates. --Grace18 13:57, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
OK, thanks!--Erónèhire 15:15, 12 March 2021 (UTC)


Hello. I noticed you made some recent edits on Arnor. I'd like your opinion on what I wrote on Talk:Arnor. Sage 07:18, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi! I didn't notice what you say when I made those small edits, feel free to undo them. I find kinda rude that Tengwar made a massive edit when it is clear you were revising it slowly; remember claiming the article next time. I also don't know what to do with the article now, I'm not into the Third Age, so I can't add much. Maybe now that it is shorter, it will be easier to revise by adding what is missing (?) --LorenzoCB 08:25, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Edits to Ancalagon, Carn Dum and other pages by a user with various IP addresses[edit]

Thank you for fixing the text and references of the Ancalagon page after the edits by an Anonymous user that seems to use different IP addresses and that does not seem to know the templates for the references. I fixed the text and the references on the Carn Dum page after the edits by what seems Tonne the same user with his or her references without templates. Some statements in the page were wrong and a lot was about Angmar and not about Carn Dum and were speculative statements. In my opinion, it does not Make Sense to duplicate much from the Angmar page and to speculate that all troops from Angmar came from Carn Dum and that every statement about Angmar also refers to Carn Dum. I focused the page in what is known about Carn Dum. Maybe you can Check the etymology section. --Akhorahil 15:11, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Good work! Yep, it is not uncommon to see references given to support assumptions and speculations, instead of giving the specific info of the article. I'll check the Etymology section when I can. --LorenzoCB 08:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Carn Dûm etymology[edit]

The statement that Carndoom and Caron-dûn mean Red Valley in Noldorin is just a theory, because the note in Return of the Shadow only says that it means Red Valley, but it does not say in which language Carndoom and Caron-dûn are. Of course we can make a theory based on components, like carn, caron, doom and dûn. Can we leave the theory that it is Noldorin or Sindarin to Mr. Salo and others and stick to the facts that are available in the reference for the Statement? --Akhorahil 18:24, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Caron-dûm has not only known Noldorin elements which correspond with the given gloss "Red Valley". The name was replaced by Nanduhirion (RS:433), which is Sindarin in LOTR, the next phase of the Noldorin language. I don't see any problem explaining what language a name is even if it is not explicitly indicated in the given reference: by sight an Elvish name can be easily identify as Q(u)enya or Sindarin/Noldorin, which is not the case with Carn-dûm, as it casually corresponds with a Gaelic term. Tolkien didn't write every single name indicating "this is Quenya, this is Sindarin", so being that strict we would not be able to categorize most of the articles with Elvish names. Anyway, I'll change the section trying to keep order. --LorenzoCB 19:34, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

On the Ages headcanon[edit]

Hola Lorenzo, Creo que tus creencias sobre las Edades son muy interesantes. Aunque tengo un pensamiento rápido; en la Carta 211, Tolkien dice que cree que estamos al final de la Sexta Edad/comienzo de la Séptima. ¿Crees que quizás la Octava Edad podría ser aquella en la que Cristo regrese, o crees que la Sexta Edad está teniendo un final bastante largo?

Me disculpo; mi Español no es muy bueno y aprendí Español Latinoamericano.

--Holdwine Meriadoc (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 22:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Buenos días Holdwine. Tu español se entiende perfectamente :) Espero que puedas entender mi parrafada.
No creo que la Sexta Edad sea especialmente larga: en esa carta, Tolkien dice que desde el fin de la Tercera Edad han pasado 6000 años aproximadamente, o sea que la Cuarta Edad y la Quinta Edad pueden tener 2000 años cada una. Tampoco significa que nuestra edad actual vaya a acabar enseguida (o sí): Dios tiene el poder de prorrogar la historia todo lo que quiera (2 Pedro 3:8-9). He visto a muchos fans decir que empezamos una nueva edad con el fin de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, pero Tolkien no parece pensar eso (él escribió la carta en 1958). Además, no hay nada en el mundo que pueda igualar a la victoria de Cristo sobre la muerte. En cualquier caso, mi headcanon se basa más en conectar el legendarium con las edades del mundo en las que Tolkien se inspiró: ¿tal vez el único punto de inflexión entre la ficción y la historia real sea la religión?
¿Por qué crees que estemos en la Séptima Edad? Creo que la historia se puede medir de diferentes maneras, o sea que no es incompatible. En la Edad Media también se hablaba de que con Cristo empezó un tiempo de Sabbath, y que cuando vuelva comenzará la Octava Edad del Eterno Domingo. Es una idea muy bonita. --LorenzoCB 08:56, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Ah, supongo que no entendí completamente esa cita. Eso es lo que sucede cuando saco una cita de contexto sin mirar mi libro para comprobarlo.
Yo mismo soy un cristiano devoto y estoy fascinado con la Iglesia medieval. Tendré que buscar la creencia de la que hablaste. Ciertamente parece una idea buena y plausible, y creo que sería una buena experiencia.
Me alegro de que mi español sea comprensible. Han pasado tres años desde que me detuve para poder concentrarme en el latín, jaja.
Holdwine Meriadoc (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 16:56, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Yo encantado de hablar de estas cuestiones. Si quieres discutir otras cosas, no tengas problema en mandarme un e-mail o buscarme en Facebook. --LorenzoCB 10:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Y como podemos buscarte en facebook? Sage 15:19, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Por mi nombre. Si ya estás en el grupo de The Tolkien Society, me encontrarás rápido, pues no hay muchos Lorenzos. --LorenzoCB 15:22, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Silmarillion chapters[edit]

Thanks for cleaning up my chapter summaries. Sometimes I lose track of things or misinterpret them. Turiannerevarine 12:53, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

No problem, the idea is to help each us other. Thank you for making those summaries, they should have been done years ago. --LorenzoCB 15:20, 15 July 2021 (UTC)


It is useful to include more precise references, which are independent of the page numbering, because it makes it easier for readers with an edition with different page numbering to find the source. Altough Help:References says that no page numbers should be included for some publications (with different editions with different page numbering), such as Unfinished Tales of Númenor and Middle-earth, I personally do not have a problem to also include a page number in addition to a reference that is independent of the page number (e.g. the number of the paragraph or whether something is mentioned at the beginning, in the middle or at the end of a chapter with many paragraphs that are hard to count). I would appreciate if you do not delete such abstract references. --Akhorahil 15:57, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I think that the MoS should require the UT pagination, I asked for that long ago, but there are no admins to decide. Not including pagination for UT makes no sense, as Christopher Tolkien uses it, and there are not so many editions of UT, unlike TLOTR, which does require pagination. No offense to your additions, I love you get involved, but those abstract references are not very consistent with the rest of the wiki, and I think we should avoid them. --LorenzoCB 19:29, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I disagree. It is important to take into consideration that many readers nowadays only have electronic versions of the books and do not have paper versions of the books. So even with books who do not have paper versions with different page numbers, such readers can not find or verify the source if only a page number is provided in the reference. For such users abstract references that are independent of the page number makes it much quicker to find a source and to verify if that source really supports what is written on Tolkien Gateway. Consistency is not the point. The point is the utility and practicality of the references for as many readers as possible. In my opinion, abstract references that are independent of the page numbers and page numbers of the most common english paper editions of the books should be combined. --Akhorahil 09:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Well, that consideration also applies to any book. Consistency is mandatory for all matters. Why only apply abstract references to UT and just in a few articles? If you want to use that system, apply it systematically to every reference in the wiki, go ahead. --LorenzoCB 09:45, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
You wrote to use abstract references (for references to books where no page numbers should be included) not just for UT (where no page numbers should be used), but also for other books. I just did that for S (where no page numbers should be used). It is not my Problem that other editors have previously not used more precise references in references to books where no page numbers should be used. The main problem of this Wiki is the lack of quality of its content and the lack of references, which allow other users to verify the quality of the content by following the references and by reading the books, which are the source. More precise references are more user friendly and enable them to find the sources more quickly and thus more efficiently. It is tiresome to read sometimes long chapters to try to find a passage that supports a statement in an article. Consistency is not a dogma, quality and user friendlyness are more relevant and it is the others who should be consistency with me father than me trying to use imprecise and inefficient references. There is already ennough category, Images and user box fetishism in this wiki, but still a Lot of basic problems with references and the quality of the content. --Akhorahil 11:53, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Abstract references should be applied to all books in addition to the page numbers in the most common paper editions of the books. I have used abstract references not only for UT, but also for other books in the past (e.g. for WJ). I usually look at the templates for the books and then already use the most detailed subsection, note or appendix that is available in the template and add note numbers, $ numbers, paragraph numbers and any headings / titles that are in the book, but that have not already been included in the template. In the case of The History of Middle-earth books. --Akhorahil 08:56, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Still you are missing the point of consistency: your are applying that system randomly. And as a system it is quite unprofessional, doesn't look good. A proper system to solve these matters is the Arda structural references, but neither this or yours are indicated in the Manual of Style. I you don't know the pages, do as the MoS says and just include the chapter, as The Silmarillion or The Hobbit. --LorenzoCB 11:55, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Neither the Manual of Style nor Help:References say that abstract references can not be used and thus do not say to just include the chapter. I am not applying that system randomly. Whether something "looks good" or not lies in the eye of the beholder and is a subjective value judgement. In my opinion, the utility of the references for readers who do not have the sources with the same page numbers and who do not have to read whole chapters to try to guess on which passage something could be based is more important. --Akhorahil 16:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Double Redirect[edit]

Thanks for fixing the double redirect of Evenstar (I missed it yesterday)! --Oromë 13:39, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

No problem. I always check the page of double redirects just in case. --LorenzoCB 17:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)


Thanks for creating the citation template for NoMe! It looks to be a top-notch template, which will find much use at TG. I had the intention today to create that very template, but I saw that you had been quick :-). --Morgan 21:50, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I figured we'd need it asap, so I made it based on previous templates. --LorenzoCB 09:34, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

"http" vs "https" in links[edit]

Hi LorenzoCB! I've noticed on a couple of articles that you change web links from "https://" to "http://" (example). Was just wondering what your reason for doing this is? (This isn't a criticism by the way! Just wondering why we should prefer http over https). Thanks! --GondolinFan 22:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I do that just to remove the ugly padlock sign. Idk if there is a problem changing it, but I've never seen the links being actually affected. --LorenzoCB 17:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Edits by the user Dour1234[edit]

Have you had time to view the edits that were made by the new user Dour1234? In his first edit (on the Isilmo page), he inserted a link to a questionable website. J.R.R. Tolkien strongly disliked racism and hated the separation of races (i.e. apartheid) (see the Tolkien on Racism section on the Racism in Tolkien's Works page. He may have stumbled on this source for the theory on the origin of the Witch-king by an internet search, but his recent edits, which mostly consisted of moving pages without using the move function and changing pages to redirect to other pages, were done without him proposing to do this on the talk pages and without waiting for the approval of other, ideally more experienced users, before doing it. In addition some of the content that he copied from other pages largely duplicated already exising information. In summary, the edits did not seem to be thorough and did not seem to be of a high quality. I agree that the content on some pages could be merged with other pages and that some pages could be changed to redirect to other pages, but that should be discussed first and should be done with care. --Akhorahil 11:05, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

You did a good job. Maybe some of the articles merged don't need to be discussed (because some already have been so), but in anycase merging and moving must be done properly and not just for the sake of completing some pendant to-do in the wiki. I guess I should prioritize merging those articles myself, it's not the first time this happens. --LorenzoCB 18:38, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

The user Dour1234, who had been blocked temporarily already in the past, has moved the Tal-Elmar page to Tal-elmar without discussing his intent to move the page on the Talk page before moving it. In addition the reason that he left in the Summary box when making the move is incorrect or at least incomplete in an important aspect. Please look at the results of my analysis of the spelling used in the chapter Tal-Elmar on the talk page Talk:Tal-elmar.

In addition the user Dour1234 moved the Wizards page to Order of Wizards although you and Shivam objected to that you referred to TG:NAMING on the Talk page before the move. Furthermore he made a lot of other edits, which included adding the category Organizations (even with with a "z" as in the American English spelling) to some pages. Please review his changes and revert them if you have the time and consider blocking the user Dour1234.

I would also appreciate your opinion on moving the Kings of Rohan page to Kings on the Mark. I left the results of my analysis and my opinion on the talk page. In my opinion users will be able to find it easily if Kings of Rohan and King of Rohan redirect to Kings of the Mark. In my opinion the article should be expanded to clarity that Kings of the Mark is the title used by the people of Rohan, because they referred to their country as the Mark or the Riddermark and that the title Kings of Rohan was only used by people who were not from Rohan and who referred to the country as Rohan. In that way Kings of Rohan would still be included in the text of the page (and could be found with search engines, such as google) and would exist as a redirect page (which could be found by typing it in on Tolkien Gateway or via a search in a search engine), but the title of the page would be the official in-universe title of the Kings of that country. --Akhorahil 10:39, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

The user Dour1234 also moved the content of the Gwaith-i-Mírdain to the People of the Jewel-smiths page, which had been a redirect to the Gwaith-i-Mírdain page, without using the move function and changed the Gwaith-i-Mírdain page to redirect to the People of the Jewel-smiths page. The name People of the Jewel-Smiths is only used in the Index of Unfinished Tales of Númenor and Middle-earth in the entry for Gwaith-i-Mírdain as the meaning of Gwaith-i-Mírdain. In the text of the chapter The History of Galadriel and Celeborn in Unfinished Tales of Númenor and Middle-earth only the terms Gwaith-i-Mírdain or Mírdain are used. As a consequnce because of the use of this term in the text and because of the Tolkien Gateway:Naming policy the Gwaith-i-Mírdain should contain the content and the People of the Jewel-smiths page should redirect to the Gwaith-i-Mírdain page, in my opinion. --Akhorahil 14:12, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I've been out these days. I just cleaned the mess save the Tar-Elmar matter, which I'll study tomorrow God willing. I'll leave my reply about the "Kings of Rohan" matter. --LorenzoCB 21:39, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

About andreth prophecy[edit]

Is the idea that the andreth prophecy refers to the war of wrath a view of christopher tolkien? Or did you come up with this view first in the world? Unsigned comment by (talk • contribs).

Christopher Tolkien links this prophecy to the Second Prophecy of Mandos, but he notices that the term "Last Battle" is applied to the War of Wrath in the same text. Interpreting the prophecy either way is up to you, but if something we should stick to Christopher's. We better keep this matter ambiguous. Please, do not edit things if you haven't read what you are citing. --LorenzoCB 10:57, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Since I have also edited that section of that article recently, I figured I'd also offer my $0.02 on the subject.
The immediate context of the quote makes it seem that Andreth just flubbed her prophecy: the plain meaning of the term "Last Battle" in this essay refers to the War of Wrath, and Ancalagon was slain by Eärendil in most versions of that story. However, CJRT's subsequent reference to the Book of Lost Tales era, "and Melko and his drakes shall curse the sword of Mormakil," suggest that this is less a goof on Andreth's part and more a parallel track of thought by JRRT that wasn't as fleshed out as the Eärendil version of the story.
I have no idea why JRRT would revisit that very old and scarcely-developed line of thought connecting Túrin with "Melko's drakes" in The Problem of Ros. But it seems to me that this is likely what happened.
The only way I can square this prophecy as being simultaneously true and compatible with the other depictions of the War of Wrath is to say that Andreth foresaw that Morgoth's creatures would also return from the Void at the Dagor Dagorath. This would allow Eärendil to slay Ancalagon in the "Last Battle" of the First Age and Túrin to slay Ancalagon in the "Last Battle" of all time.
The trouble with that interpretation is that I can't find any explicit reference to this notion of Ancalagon (or any other of Morgoth's creatures) returning alongside Morgoth anywhere else. In light of that, it seems to me an awful stretch to assert this as being compatible with the "main" Legendarium. To that extent, this prophecy probably rightly belongs in an OVOTL section. Unless, that is, someone can find textual references to the idea of Morgoth's servants or creatures returning alongside him at the Dagor Dagorath. --Mord 22:59, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, I think the matter of prophecies is well explained in Túrin#Legacy for now. IMO, there is no need to put that info in OVOTL, but in anycase, we better keep the different prophecies together.
About what the text refers to: I disagree with the idea of JRRT coming back to TBOLT idea so many decades later; he didn't even returned to consult that phase, instead he usually continued developing from previous texts. I also think that Christopher was wrong when comparing Andreth's prophecy with the Second Prophecy of Mandos (although the compilation of the different versions was pretty necessary and probably that was the best place to put it), because the different versions of this prophecy follow a "tradition" that Andreth's prophecy does not respect at all: it doesn't have the same structure, nor the content, nor the context of the end of tales. However, I was wrong with a point that I just noticed re-reading the commentary: Christopher doesn't think Andreth's prophecy refers to the Dagor Dagorath (he seems to support that at first sight because he includes a whole page comparing the prophecy of the Last Battle at the End of time), but he says that the concept of the return of Túrin was moved to the Last Battle at the end of the First Age (Christopher should notice that both of Túrin returns are compatible, tho). Another important point is that it makes no sense that Túrin leaves the Circles of the World after the Dagor Dagorath (mainly because the Circles probably will no longer exist); neither makes sense that the text mentions Túrin in particular to explain that the language of the Haladim will be heard again, when in a scatological context the whole House could be back. I'd love to delve into The Problem of Ros, it seems to have a perspective from both Aman and Middle-earth, and it is weird that Andreth's prophecy seems to be written before the end of the War of Wrath (or not, maybe the writer simply had no clue of what happened there). Holly molly, so much info around...
I think it is compatible that both Eärendil and Túrin killed Ancalagon in the War of Wrath. --LorenzoCB 16:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

BOLT category[edit]

What exactly is the use for Category:The Book of Lost Tales - and what to do with articles like the ones on Maltar, Nen, etc. which clearly belong to the same time period as the rest of BoLT related articles?IvarTheBoneless 18:05, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

I created that category to gather its subcategories, which existed previously. I don't see the need for those articles to be in that category, the same way Category:The Lord of the Rings does not include concepts, but bookish topics. With categories like C:Qenya locations, things are already categorized, no need for more unless we come with new ideas for TBOLT matter, which should be discussed and planned so they can be properly applied. --LorenzoCB 19:07, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

A Thank You, An Apology For Past Edits, And A Solution To Prevent A Third Blocking[edit]

First off, I would like to thank you for unblocking me on the 13th rather than the 14th, even if only by a few hours. Due to the fact that you have blocked me twice, I am now only going to edit and make suggestions on talk pages in order to minimize the chance of you blocking me again, as I do not want to risk breaking policy and this is the best way for me to do so without the risk of being tempted to edit on the actual pages. Though I will still be very active on Tolkien Gateway, hopefully, there will not be any more problems unintentionally caused by me. Dour1234, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Despite the announcement by the user Dour1234 to only edit on talk pages and to make sugestions on talk pages, the user Dour1234 has made edits on actual pages (e.g. Old Forest Road, Menelmacar, Menelmacil, Nazgûl, Wizards, Order of Wizards, Standard of Elendil, Thranduil, Legolas (elf of Gondolin), Denethor (son of Lenwë), Denethor, Denweg, Dân). The user Dour1234 removed the category Organizations from the Wizards page and added the category Organizations to the Order of Wizards despite the fact that you told him not to do it and explained to him that the category organizations is already applied to the Wizards page and without prior approval to his request. I noticed that on the Nazgûl page a reference to a chapter of The Lord of the Rings has been added without adding a page number and without any explanation which reasonable efforts the user Dour1234 has made to obtain a page number from the 50th anniversary edition of The Lord of the Rings and why the user Dour1234 has been unable to obtain it. In another instance the user Dour1234 made an edit on an actual page (in the Other names section on the Old Forest Road page) without a reference to the chapter (or subsection of a chapter it it exists in the Template:UT) and simply announced in the Summary box that he did not have the time to add a link and reference and that he intend to do so in the future. This behaviour is unacceptable and creates a lot of work for other users who have to review and correct those edits. The user Dour1234 has been warned and blocked before and should be blocked even it the user Dour1234 tries to correct the errors. I ask you to review these edits if Tolkien Gateway:Manual of Style and Help:References have been adhered to. --Akhorahil 15:30, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
LorenzoCB, Is there any potential way you or someone else could maybe do a sort of a half-block or something or that nature, meaning stopping me from editing actual pages, but still allowing me to edit on talk pages? I often think rashly and often forget certain things. This is all only intensified by my love of all things Tolkien related. It is something that I am very ashamed of. I have actively been trying to find a solution for a while. What are some of the other things that could work besides blocking, if I may ask? Dour1234, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Caring so much for the talkpages doesn't help to the wiki, specially if you proceed to do as you consider. What we need is actual editing, which must be done properly with no rush. Anyone who is acquainted with the wiki, its categories and style, and provides actual references, can edit without using the talkpages, which should be used for actual difficult matters and not for trivial things like moving the own talkpages you created two days ago. I'm not blocking you right now, but please, abstain from editing, study first how the wiki works and get to the sources. If you are unable to control yourself, I will block you again, and it will not be partially or for a short time.
Akhorahil, I don't find particularly problematic that users include references to TLOTR without a page number. I don't have a copy of the 50 anniversary edition (yet) and I won't explain my situation every time I include a ref. You are right about your other complaints. --LorenzoCB 16:42, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Desipite you having reverted several of the user Dour1234's edit to the Two Watchers page, he has made six new edits to that page of which three were reversions of his own edits. His chaotic way of editing with many edits and reverting his own edits makes it more difficult to review his changes. In addition he seems to have realized only in his penultimate edit that the Silent Watchers are not the same as the Two Watchers and previously even had the opinion on the talk page of the Two Watchers page that the Silent Watchers is the proper name for the Two Watchers and some of his edits conerned the name boxes in the user box. He could have done some careful reading of the passages in The Lord of the Rings where the Silent Watchers and the Two Watchers are mentioned to find out that they are not the same and that the Silent Watchers are first mentioned by Gollum in the context of the the main pass of Minas Morgul and Minas Morgul before Gollum even mentions that there is another way via the stairs of Cirith Ungol and that Gollum does not even mention that this other pass is guarded by the Tower of Cirith Ungol and that the second time The Silent Watchers are mentioned by Gorbag, an orc from Minas Morgul and that the Silent Watchers were uneasy more than two days ago, which is approximately when Gollum, Frodo and Sam were at the bridge over the river Morgulduin in the Morgul Vale close to Minas Morgul just before they climbed the Stairs of Cirith Ungol. All these edits and possible work for other users to check those edits could have been avoided. The user Dour1234 still seems not to have heeded your advice not to be so hasty with his edits and to pepare for his edits diligently. Prior blocks do not seem to have changed the behaviour of the user Dour1234 much. I would appreciate if you could do something to help with this problem. --Akhorahil 09:37, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

After I made my edit I noticed that the Recent changes now shows that you blocked the user Dour1234, which the Recent changes did not show before I made the edit (there seems to be a delay until edits show up on the Recent edits page. Thank you for noticing it and for having take action. We seem to have had similar thoughts about those edits and the about possible action to be taken concerning that matter. --Akhorahil 09:43, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Ooff, mucho texto... I appreciate Dour's good intentions, but I've been consenting him too much. Merely touching things around does not contribute to the wiki. I encourage him to get actual bibliography and delve into it, the firsts steps to become a Tolkien scholar. --LorenzoCB 15:09, 16 May 2022 (UTC)


I will stop. About how long do you think is reasonable that I should wait between edits? Dour1234, 21 March 2022

Just use talkpages to discuss actual difficult matters, the wiki doesn't work as a forum. Also, think twice before editing, you are correcting yourself too much and making too many microedits. --LorenzoCB 08:09, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

For Signature......Again[edit]

Hi, LorenzoCB you might have noticed that my signature isn't working. I have tried almost everything. Kindly help.--Shivam 14:57, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Example ↑ no link to my user page.

Mmmm, no idea. I guess you use --~~~~ ? But anycase, I don't understand what's the source of that problem and I don't think I have the requirements to solve it. Sorry. --LorenzoCB 15:36, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Okay, no problem. Shivam
When you go to the "My preferences" page, what do you see in the text box "Signature"? This is what I see for myself: --Mord 04:33, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Finally, something worked. Thanks Mord.--Shivam 05:46, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Webcite template[edit]

I have to apologize for referencing Eldamo and other sites without having an inkling of webcite template. I will rectifiy these articles. IvarTheBoneless 22:39, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Don't worry. Thanks! --LorenzoCB 22:55, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

User Niclosam[edit]

Hi Lorenzo, I don't know if you noticed a new user account has been made named Niclosam. In his user page there is a link to a commercial website. I don't think its appropriate. Also the whole user page feels like an advertisement.--Shivam 13:46, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi. No need to explain or notice me unless I don't edit after many days. Just do as Akhorahil did without permission: blanck the page and include the spam tag. Thanks anyway! --LorenzoCB 15:16, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Ok,thanks.--Shivam 15:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Consent of the artist(s)[edit]

I have uploaded, and might upload some more images, of artists who up to this point haven't given their consent to do so or haven't even been asked to contribute their work on TG.

That being said, I present to you a screenshot of the artist's agreement to post their artwork here (since you are an admin now): Olga Kalinichenko's consent.

If it is alright with you, I will forward all evidence of artists' permission to use their work here, on your talkpage. Unless you can think of a better solution? - IvarTheBoneless 01:06, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Never mind, I just realized there is the Images of evidence of permission granted by copyright holders. - IvarTheBoneless 06:57, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
You should keep the screenshots and send them to Mith via email. We should delete that category IMO, but you can you make use of it if you wish. Please, do not upload images until the artist gave permission. Put the delete tag in those images uploaded without the artist's consent. Be patient and do not upload things until the artists answer your requests, even (and particularly) if they never answer you. We must be very strict with this matter. --LorenzoCB 08:29, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I'm well aware of that - I've reached out before to great many artists and got their consent, I just wasn't quite sure where to present the proof of their agreement. P.S. I don't really have an email, at least not one that I have used in quite a long time, so I doubt I'll be able to log into it. How about I just post some artists' copyright proofs to Mith's talkpage instead, would that be acceptable?
Also, I too believe that the category you were talking about is a bit clunky and unneccesary, after trying it out. - IvarTheBoneless 15:32, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Mith's talkpage is fine. He will also decide what to do with that category. You are saying you uploaded images while waiting for the artist's consent. Please, if that's true, delete those asap and wait to the artist's response. --LorenzoCB 16:33, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
It is not true - all the art I've uploaded recently has been approved by the artists themselves, and has been sitting on my desktop for quite some time, as you can see for yourself if you check the dates on the imgur proofs I posted; I never upload artworks without permission of the artists.
What I meant by: "I have uploaded, and might upload some more images, of artists who up to this point haven't given their consent to do so or haven't even been asked to contribute their work on TG" is that I might in the future look for some other artists and ask for their blessing to upload their work, although I worded that sentence quite badly, I admit. - IvarTheBoneless 17:00, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I'll link you the same proofs as I have to Mith in his talkpage:
And as for any other artwork I upload from here forward, for anyone doubting that it isn't approved by the artists themselves, I can always link them the proof. - IvarTheBoneless 17:12, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I noticed you put the links there, no need for more. Thanks. Maybe it is because I'm not an English speaker, but I'm not able to understand that sentence otherway. No problem tho. --LorenzoCB 17:23, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
No worries, it was I who did not express myself clearly enough. - IvarTheBoneless 18:56, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Concerning account[edit]

Hello, it seems like my account is at a low level, as I cannot do certain things in this website, such as uploading images, sandbox...etc. May I ask how could I gain such abilities? Luotiansha 04:10, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi. You will be an autoconfirmed user after 50 edits and a week after registration. That will allow you to do those mentioned things. --LorenzoCB 07:13, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Category:Uncategorized journals issues[edit]

Hi, I intend to create a new category page "Uncategorized journals issues", as a subcategory of Category:Journals. In this category I want to put all the journal issues that do not have a Tokiengateway wikipage about the journal it belongs to. (either because the journal itself is foreign or less significant) (such as The Times Literary Supplement 14 September 2012)

In this way Category:Journals will be cleaner and easier to navigate. Do you approve this? Luotiansha 06:04, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I'm fine with it. Maybe a more correct term would be "Loose journal numbers" or something like that? I'm not a native English speaker, but you get the idea. --LorenzoCB 21:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Unfortunately me neither D: I'll just go with "Unsorted journal issues". Luotiansha 10:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Why Was My IP Blocked?[edit]

I was just wondering why my IP has been blocked. It says it's because of vandalism, but all of my edits have been trying to improve the articles. Sometimes the syntax is weak or there are spelling mistakes, and I just want to polish the phrasing up a bit. I also sometimes add helpful information as well (like my contributions to the Mîm page and the Cuiviénen page). I've never tried to intentionally vandalize pages. I'm a genuinely massive Tolkien fan and use this site frequently. I admit I'm not the best when it comes to citing things correctly, but I can try harder in the future! Thanks for considering my message. Unsigned comment by [[User:|]] ([[User talk:|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/|contribs]]).

I don't know why I blocked you because idk who are you or what you did. Sometimes a blocking is just to prevent bad editing to keep going and doesn't mean your contributions are necessarily seen as vandalism. Of course you are encouraged to improve your editing and create an user account, which would avoid your IP to be trapped by other users' block, as it has happened before. --LorenzoCB 09:45, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Vinyar Tengwar[edit]

Hi again. I see that all VT issues wiki pages has the sentence "The content list above only contains published articles." I don't know what that supposes to mean, is there any "unpublished articles" for each VT issue? or is there any policy involved?

Anyways, I intend to make each VT issue's content more complete (an example I made is Vinyar Tengwar 11). If such change is not against any policy, I'll work on all the remaining issues in the similar way. Is that okay? Luotiansha 08:39, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I don't know, actually. I guess it means that the list of contents is limited to the articles in the issue. In that case, if you expand that section, you can freely remove that sentence. Please, if you expand those sections (which is great, go ahead), try to apply the same to all the issues for the sake of consistency. I have all VT, so I'll try to give a hand. --LorenzoCB 23:03, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Aye, got it. Thanks a lot for the help! Luotiansha 06:15, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
In fact, while my work is mainly about the "formatting" of the contents sections of VT pages (which is relatively easy to do), there is another important work to do (I believe), which I'm not confident to do myself (due to my language skills etc.). That is to provide details to the "unique materials" appearing on a number of VT issues. You see, many of the entries are marked as The above article is previously unpublished primary material from the Tolkien archives, but it is not mentioned what exactly are those materials. Vinyar Tengwar 12 this I think can be a good example (adding info below that sentence). I would feel most grateful if you could lend a help on this matter. Luotiansha 13:48, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
I was about to tell you about that before, but I wasn't sure. Obviously those statements make sense in some of the VT articles, when the journal was transitioning to be only a publication of Tolkien's works. Maybe it would be more appropiate to include those statements as notes, less intrusive. And maybe in some cases this can be noted in the introduction, like when VT began focusing on Tolkien's work (I think it was VT39). --LorenzoCB 21:44, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Email Verification[edit]

First off, I'm a transgender woman. I originally was here as pinkkeith which had my dead name in it. I created this profile because I couldn't log on my old account or retrieve a request to update the password. I also wanted a username that reflected my current name. I tried to verify my email address on this account, but I'm not receiving the email to verify it. It looks like out of the current administrators that you are the most recent active, so I reached out to you. Is there anything you can do to fix this problem? Thanks! --Pinkkatie 02:56, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Greetings. I don't have the power to check internal stuff of the wiki. I'm not sure, but the e-mail is optional when creating an account, so maybe verification is not needed. Have you checked that you receive e-mails when doing things mentioned in Special:Preferences or asking for a new password? Anyway, you seem to be logged in and editing, so I don't see the problem here. Your new user will be autoconfirmed after a week and 50 edits. --LorenzoCB 23:03, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for the quick reply. I just wanted to make sure that I could verify my email in case I forget the password again and need to reset it. --Pinkkatie 00:25, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
What can I get in touch with to fix this problem? I still cannot verify my email because I'm not getting the confirmation email sent to me. I am using my personal email address and can't locate it in any of my folders. --Pinkkatie 12:02, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
What's the problem exactly? I told you the email is optional, so I think there is no verification process. --LorenzoCB 21:24, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Statute of Finwë and Míriel[edit]

Hello, Lorenzo! On Tolkien Gateway, the Year of the Tree when the Statute was proclaimed is listed as Y.T. 1172, which is taken from the Annals of Aman. However, in the Later Quenta Silmarillion it is stated that after death of Míriel (which occured in Y.T. 1170) twelve years passed before the Statute was proclaimed in Y.T. 1182, the same year when Finwë plead before Manwë:

Yet Finwë was not content, being young and eager; and he still desired to have more children to bring mirth into his house. When, therefore, twelve years had passed he went again to Manwë.
Of the Simarils and the Darknening of Valinor, p. 258

So, what's date more correct? If it's the latter date, then why the former one is used instead?
Ar-Zigûr 15:45, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I can't check my books right now, but I assume it's the latter. However, the Annals of Aman had many later corrections, so I'm not certain. In answer to your question: the Annals were taken as the main source for the dates and whoever did it was not aware of this info. I will change this when I can; the Statute is a very interesting topic for me. Thanks for pointing it out. --LorenzoCB 16:49, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Large number of edits by the user MelkorAscendant[edit]

The user MelkorAscendant has made a large number of edits to many pages that need to be reviewed and corrected when necessary. I do not know if he had been blocked in the past, but there are long gaps without edits if you Look at bis user contributions. After he edited the Morgul-knife page by including information about the Morgul wound of Steward Boromir that was not related to a Morgul-knife, because he was not turned into a wraith and instead died within days without using a template for a reference and making general speculative statements and making many individual micro edits and not correcting existing incorrect information in the page, I tried to talk to the user in the user's talk page, but the user did not respond. As a consequence, I corrected the Morgul-knife page, but the user edited it again inserting much of bis old deleted content again with many micro edits. As a consequence, I reverted those edits on the page. Interestingly the user Dour1234 was also active on that page. --Akhorahil 06:07, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

There were two edits that I made on that page for two different reasons. One was to add a reference to a sentence with a "[source?]" next to it, and the other was a result of a misreading on my part. Other than those two edits, I had not been on that page since Akhorahil had organized the page far better than what I tried to do in the first of my two edits. --Dour1234, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
I used the reference that was found by the user Dour1234 when I cleaned up the whole page and mentioned that in the summary box of that respective edit. I already took care of the edit by the user Dour1234 that was caused by bis misunderstanding. --Akhorahil 07:11, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Yep, not good contributions. He has not been blocked previously, but I'll do it if he continues in that same ruinous path. Btw, you don't need to undo the edits one by one. Go the History tab of the article, select the edits from the user and click on "compare". --LorenzoCB 07:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
I have started reviewing the other recent edits by the user MelkorAscendant. I noticed that you have already been reverted his edit on the Morgoth page and that Grace edited after some of his edits on the Witch-king page, but he made further edits after that and that Grace corrected things after his edits on the Nazgûl page. I would appreciate if you could review and correct his changes that he made to pages that relate to the First Age, as that seems to be one of primary areas of your interest and expertise (War of Wrath, Canon, First War, Dagor Bragollach, Fall of Gondolin and Balrogs). I have just finished reviewing his edit to the Farmer Maggot page. This edit was rather unnecessary and neither corrected the existing speculation about the motive of the hiss being in anger and that Maggot was angry about the trespassing in the passage nor that the sequence of events with his dog Grip and the leaving of the rider was not in chronological order. I will also review his other edits on pages that primarily relate to the Third Age (Aragorn, Witch-king, Nazgûl). Thank you for your tip for reverting several edits. I can only select two individual edits to compare all differences between those two edits and used this function in the past to check what had been changed in an edit. I did not notice that there was an "undo" button in the top right corner of the newer edits. While this method of undoing seems to undo all changes between those two edits, it does not create thet automatic summary text for the edit that it has been reverted to the last edit by a user that I have seen in reverts that were made by you or other administrators. Did I miss something or is this mass revert function something that is only available to administrators, but not to "normal" users? --Akhorahil 14:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
You can select two different edits, not only the last two. Once you have the comparison, you don't need to be an admin to be able to undo it. Just play around with the circles in the list and you'll get the idea. An example of the result: --LorenzoCB 15:29, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Large number of low quality edits of the user Dour1234 after returning from being blocked[edit]

It seems that the block of the user Dour1234 expirted. I noticed a large number of edits by the user Dour1234. The old problems seem to persist with his edits. The sources do not seem to have been read with the proper attention creating incorrect entries. In addition, standard titles of sections such as "Other versions of the legendarium" are not used, instead "Other versions" was used. He still made a lot of micro edits on the same pages. Furthermore page numbers are missing for references where they should be included and page numbers have been included for references where they should not be included. He creates extra work for other users to review and correct his edits. I have cleaned up the worst of his recent edits. In my opinion, his edits are doing more harm than good. --Akhorahil 16:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi! No need to write down everything done by others; I can see that, you are right and you must notice I also correct those edits. Thank you very much for your own work and for taking care of cleaning up things. We can always improve the edits of others as a way to help us each others and the wiki, so excuse me if I seem kinda permissible. Apparently Dour is gonna be out for a time. I invite you to join the Discord server, where we discuss many things, including the recent edits you complaint about. All aside, it is assumed that users are making "all reasonable efforts to include page numbers", so they can always include references without pagination, as long as they include the chapter number. --LorenzoCB 19:16, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
The user Dour1234 continued with further low quality edits, especially to the Mouth of Sauron and Captain of the Haven pages. Even worse, after my corrections of the edits by the user Dour1234 and of other deficiencies on those pages and after I had explicitly sated in the Summary box of my edits that I will make further corrections, the user Dour1234 again edited those pages reintroducing deficiencies. I have the impression that the user Dour1234 still has not learned basic standards after being blocked, because of past edits. In addition edits should not be done for the sake of editing, such as changes to the wording or phrasing and should not introduce speculations without disclosing that those are merely speculations. The edits of the user Dour1234 create extra work for other users to review and correct them. I recommend to block the user Dour1234. For example Dour1234 changed the name in the infobox, which is shown as a title above the infobox from The Mouth of Sauron to Mouth of Sauron. The user Dour1234 does not seem to understand English grammar related to titles (e.g. Aragorn is a name, in the chapter Strider "I am Aragorn son of Arathorn"; The Mouth of Sauron is a title, in the chapter The Black Gate Opens he says "I am the Mouth of Sauron."). So he is not just Mouth of Sauron, but the Mouth of Sauron, which is spelled "The Mouth of Sauron" in a title line above a box. Dour1234 added the title Lieutenant of the Tower, but the correct title is Lieutenant of the Tower of Barad-dûr. In addition he changed the position in the infobox to Messenger and added entry from the Index of TLOTR as a reference. As I have explained previously the index of TLOTR should not be used as a reference, because as the foreword of the index explains it was not written by J.R.R. Tolkien or by Christopher Tolkien. In addition "Messenger" is used in the text of the chapter, so the chapter can be used as a reference. Dour1234 added "He was of the Black Númenóreans strongly devoted to", which is incorrect grammar. The user Dour1234 changed "many of the Dark Lord's plans" to "much of the Dark Lord's plans". Much is used with singular uncountable nouns. Plans are plural and plans can be counted. The rest of the edit was unnecessary. In the last edit the user Dour1234 changed the othernames line in the infox from The Messenger (which is used in the published chapter) to Mordu with a reference to WR, although Mordu was already mentioned in the OVOTL with this reference and the name Mordu was abandoned by J.R.R. Tolkien and thus should not be in the infobox, but only in the OVOTL. Further he moved Lieutenant of the Tower of Barad-dûr from the position line to the titles line in the infobox and added a reference although there was already a reference for Lieutenant of the Tower of Barad-dûr in the main text of the page. In addition, he added Messenger of Mordor to the position line in the infobox, although he is referred to as the or a "Messenger" eight times and only once as "Messenger from Mordor" (simply because he comes from Mordor) in the chapter. The rest of the edit was unnecessary or introduced further speculative and unnecessary elements, such as that the Lieutenant of the Tower of Barad-dûr was an important commander in the land of Mordor and then backtracking and stating that its (the title's) associated details and duties were unknown. The first edit of the user Dour1234 to the Captain of the Haven page was unnecessary, added a reference to the non-canon Index of TLOTR and included an unnecessary explanation of the ambiguity of the term "overthrow" in a newly created OVOTL although it has nothing do do with an OVOTL, because it is used in the published text and the term "overthrew" speaks for itself and readers who are unsure of its meaning can look up the meaning in an English dictionary. The last edit of the user Dour1234's to the Captain of the Haven page linked "person" to the "Men" page although it is never said that he was a man. Like Gothmog, the Captain of the Haven could theoretically have been an Orc or of some other race, which is why I deliberately used the vague term person in my edit and did not link it to any page associated with a race. In addition it reintroduced unnecessary content, which I had removed after the user Dour1234's edit. I will revert the user Dour1234's edits. I took the time to explain it to you (yes "mucho texto"), so that you see that this is not an "edit war", but that this is about correcting problems introduced by edits and edits that lack basic thoroughness and that you can consider whether a blocking of the user Dour1234 is an appropriate course of action. --Akhorahil (talk) 10:14, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Dour was trying to move in the info from the title's article. I agree those edits could be better and undo them was justified. However, I asked to avoid warring about it, so it would have been more appopiate if you both explained your edits before making more changes. I'm not angry, but I'll revise the article myself, keeping it protected for a while. I ask Dour to avoid touching the infoboxes until knowing how they work. --LorenzoCB (talk) 11:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Gil-galad and TG:CANON[edit]

Hi Lorenzo, Ar-Zigûr has requested that we discuss an issue of editorial policy here on your talk page rather than on Talk:Gil-galad.

TG:CANON is this: "Tolkien Gateway editors should not judge what is canon and what is not."

The various JRRT/CJRT revisions to Gil-galad's parentage makes for a highly visible stress test of this policy. Indeed, it is being used as a litmus test in the broader community to judge TG as a source of accurate information:

"What hair colour is Gil-galad and what is his parentage? Tolkiengateway has answers, yet Tolkien did not decide these."
Reddit user DarrenGrey (emphasis mine)

Last week, Hyarion edited the page in response to these comments. I don't think he went far enough, so I replaced all references to parentage (i.e. in the infobox and beginning of 'History' section) with links to the 'Parentage' section and explained my position on Talk:Gil-galad. Ar-Zigûr reverted these without explanation. Rather than edit warring, here we are.

I believe the policy can accurately be restated as: our role is not to decide what JRRT meant, only to document what he wrote.

I believe it is both wrong and a violation of TG:CANON for us to give preference to any version of Gil-galad's parentage. I believe that it is especially egregious to do so in the article infobox, which necessarily lacks space for a nuanced or detailed explanation. I believe that the most accurate, most neutral, and least repetitive means of providing the reader with all the facts is to have the full story in one section with all other mentions of the subject in the article redirecting to that section. --Mord 17:08, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I think giving preference to any version is not so problematic. That sentence in TG:CANON was written when there was no OVOTL sections. All versions are explained within the article at some point, and if a random guy only checks the infobox it is not our fault (although definitely, we must be more careful with the infoboxes). Gil-galad as the son of Orodreth was cool because it allowed to explain better the High Kingship of the Noldor, but I'm ok with leaving the parentage obscure and just explain all the versions apart, but keeping the "History" section in-universe. Please, avoid edit wars in general. I left the article with Orodreth version, but I'd like to revise it properly and see what others think. --LorenzoCB (talk) 18:30, 6 September 2022 (UTC)