Tolkien Gateway


[edit] Different Image

I don't particularly like Steve Hidook's Balrog image. I'd like to replace it with an image by Daniel Govar or John Howe. Is there a system for changing images of popular entries? Thanks. --Ebakunin 01:05, 30 May 2006 (EDT)

Daniel Govar
John Howe

Thanks for bringing this to our attention Ebakunin as this was definitely something that would arise and we need to have a system for. At the moment because of the amount of activity on the encyclopedia one is free to edit and change out any images one likes. Sometimes a fresh image is needed. I definitely agree that especially the John Howe image would make a great replacement. In the future however I think it would be preferred to vote on changing the primary image of an article, as it truly needs to be the best representation of the article and this can cause hostility and edit wars when the choice of the image differs among editors. In short, do as you please as the encyclopedia is as much yours as it is anyone else's :) --Hyarion 01:13, 30 May 2006 (EDT)

Can we please NOT have any of the three images above? Because none of them remotely represent the Balrog. The John Howe one which is the current image shows a Balrog as having horns and fangs! I can't bear to look at it. Balrogs look somewhat like MEN, people, not huge horned, tailed monsters, and none of these images do justice to the Balrog's dark aura. I'm deleting the image. If you do a Google Image search for 'Balrog', not one of the finds is even close to a real Balrog. The movie Balrog has misguided many people, and these images only serve to misguide people further. Better to have no image than a misguiding one. I myself am a pitiful artist, but if someone could draw or find a good textually correct image of a Balrog, please do post it.--Barnikel 00:20, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

I'm leaving the movie image at the bottom, because it is clearly demarcated as a portrayal in an adaptation. The other Howe images were posted like they were authoritative Balrog images, in the middle of an argument about wings.--Barnikel 00:28, 5 June 2006 (EDT)
I agree with Barnikel that the image from The Lord of the Rings (film series) should be kept for the sake of all the movie-fans. While we also need to make sure the images at least remotely resemble a Balrog, I also think its important to at least display some images even though they may not be accurate, otherwise all our articles would be imageless save the ones drawn by J.R.R. Tolkien himself. Maybe if we list what is inaccurate about the image when displayed. That being said I'm fine with leaving the above images off of the article for now until we can find some more appropriate ones. Thanks for your input! --Hyarion 01:18, 5 June 2006 (EDT)
Unfortunately Hyarion is right. I have yet to see an artist draw a balrog with no wings (debatable - wouldn't reject their image for that), about twice the height of a man (see Lost Tales 2), and the rest. John Howe's do look more beast-like than man-like. I have heard, however, than an image by Rob Alexander came close, though I can't confirm that. --Narfil Palùrfalas 07:53, 5 June 2006 (EDT)
Hyarion, I am not saying that all articles be imageless. There are many cases where even, shudder, movie images won't do much harm (although here artist images would be better). Like, Gandalf, for example. But the Balrog is a special case. In the absense of authoritative images, people tend to imagine Balrogs as artists have erroneously portrayed them for decades. But at a place like this, where there should be consistent and correct information about Tolkien's world, we shouldn't be posting images just to make articles look less bland, especially in cases like Balrogs or Ents. So I don't think it would be a problem not to have images for some articles like this one.--Barnikel 11:06, 5 June 2006 (EDT)
Narfil, I assume you meant this picture?
Rob Alexander - The Balrog of Moria.jpg
I think this picture portrays the Balrog rather decent. The quality of the pic itself isn't that decent, unfortunately. --Earendilyon 11:15, 5 June 2006 (EDT)

[edit] Wings

Could we put in the "For Wings" Section that it is possible that the Balrogs had wings, but never used them [like penguins, maybe? ;)]? -Lord Aragorn1414 14:44, 17 July 2006 (EDT)

I definitely think that is worthy of mentioning and was surprised to find it is not already listed. Though I'm not sure Balrogs should be compared to penguins :p --Hyarion 14:48, 17 July 2006 (EDT)
This is mentioned in passing in the against wings section: "Obviously, it is possible that the wings could not be used for flying." --Ted C 16:37, 16 November 2006 (EST)
Related: Did anyone besides me get the impression that the movie Balrog's wings were basically composed of smoke, making them useless for flight? --Ted C 16:41, 16 November 2006 (EST)
Yeah, it certainly seems like that to me, I think Jackson did a great job in avoiding the wings controversy. Ælfwine228 15:37, 20 July 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Plural of Balrog

Isn't Balrogs the anglicisation for the plural for Balrog? Shouldn't it correctly be called Balryg? Unsigned comment by Pinkkeith (talk • contribs).

The correct Sindarin plural of Balrog is unknown: it could be Belryg, Balryg, Belroeg or Balroeg. None of these is attested, while "Balrogs" is. -- Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 15:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)