Talk:Luvailin: Difference between revisions
From Tolkien Gateway
Latest comment: 19 November 2013 by Sage
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:All articles about concepts in Tolkien's fictional works should be in past tense. See [[Tolkien Gateway:Manual of Style#Tense|Manual of Style: Tense]]. --[[User:Morgan|Morgan]] 23:16, 18 November 2013 (UTC) | :All articles about concepts in Tolkien's fictional works should be in past tense. See [[Tolkien Gateway:Manual of Style#Tense|Manual of Style: Tense]]. --[[User:Morgan|Morgan]] 23:16, 18 November 2013 (UTC) | ||
::I'm not sure about whether that rule should apply everywhere. I'd argue that Aman should be an exception... but even then, if we suppose that Aman still exists as of 2013 AD, we don't know how much of it remains the same and if Luvailin still exists. [[User:Sage|Sage]] 10:45, 19 November 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 10:45, 19 November 2013
Maybe this has been discussed before, but anyway: should we say "was" or "is" when we talk about things in Aman? Aren't we supposed to think that (unlike Middle-earth and especially Númenor) anything that "was" there still "is" there even if the Undying Lands have been removed from "our world"? --Tik 22:51, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
- All articles about concepts in Tolkien's fictional works should be in past tense. See Manual of Style: Tense. --Morgan 23:16, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about whether that rule should apply everywhere. I'd argue that Aman should be an exception... but even then, if we suppose that Aman still exists as of 2013 AD, we don't know how much of it remains the same and if Luvailin still exists. Sage 10:45, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
