Tolkien Gateway

Talk:List of Tolkien Encyclopedias

[edit] Tolkien Gateway - not the biggest anymore?

I'm afraid that the TG isn't the biggest anymore.

Lotro Lorebook

The statistics say 1800 pages, but that's only the homepage and editing help. There are already 2200 Lore-pages, but those aren't counted because they start with Lore:"Article name". That's the same with NPC's, Location's, Items, etc. All these start with NPC: or Location: They're at least over 10.000 article, but I can't be sure because all of these can't be counted... --Amroth 13:00, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Well I don't think they can claim our title based on guesswork and estimation alone :P. I would argue that NPC:, Location:, Item: etc. shouldn't be counted since they're about in-game content... I mean, what does Padded Shoes (Level 47) have to do with the works of J.R.R. Tolkien? And there are literally tens of thousands of those articles. —Aulë the Smith (Tk·Cb) 13:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't say that a LOTR Online Wiki is a Tolkien Encyclopaedia. -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  13:39, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
then why is the unofficial LOTRO wiki on Wikia counted? I think that at least the lore part of LOTRO Lorebook desirves to be counted, that's 2200 articles. --Amroth 13:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm currently debating with myself what counts and what doesn't (I. Incidentally, if you want a wiki which really does beat us hands down, then see --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 16:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
IMO, LOTR Online Encyclopaedias should not be included. -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  16:57, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I think the Lorebook is even bigger. Agree that the LOTRO-only wiki's shouldn't be included. But the lore-part of the Lorebook should be included. That part goes about the lore alone, simular to the Tolkien portals of Wikipedia. The LOTRO Lorebook is a strange sort of wiki, because its a wiki inside a game (LOTRO).
@Aulë: But this article is --Amroth 17:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
That's in the Lore: namespace. My point was that it is the other namespaces that shouldn't be counted. I agree that the Lore: namespace constitutes a "Tolkien wiki", but then that only has 2200 articles and so is a long way from beating us. —Aulë the Smith (Tk·Cb) 17:24, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Index?

Is this really an index item? This is tabular information and not actually a list. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 16:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps, however I'm weary of moving it back to List of Tolkien Encyclopedias. Would Tolkien Encyclopedias be more appropriate?-- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  17:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
That would be a descriptive article, wouldn't it - about Tolkien encyclopedias. This is a tabular list! --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 18:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
How about pages which are both indexes/lists/articles, such as Letters not published in "The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien"? --Morgan 18:27, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
They're right on the cusp, I think, put would favour mainspace. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 16:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Apart from Index:Tolkien Encyclopedias and Index:Letters not published in "The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien", which lists need to be moved back? P.S. the original articles will need to be deleted so that I can move them back to their original names. P.P.S. should we make Category:Lists exclusive to Index namespace lists?-- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  21:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
1) To be honest, no idea; I've not gone through them all. 2) I shall delete the redirects now. 3) Why not have Category:Index in Category:Contents as a top-level thing. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 22:17, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Done. -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  23:05, 21 June 2011 (UTC)