Tolkien Gateway

User talk:Þelma

Þelma, welcome!

Hello 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 or ask me on my talk page. Keep up the great work! — Ederchil


Contents

[edit] Sons of Feanor?

Just thought I'm remind you that much of the Silmarillion was about Feanor's hasty vow and all the tragic results that flowed it-- the Doom of Mandos, the Kinslayings, and all the other catastrophes. Maedhros was the only brother with redeeming qualities, and in the end even he succumbed to fate. --Theoden1 08:19, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Greetings, Theoden1, and thank you for your message. :) I am aware that most of the tragedies that occurred in the Silmarillion were a direct consequence of the Oath. But to me, they happened more because of those who opposed it. They are as much to blame for it (except for one event, which I will discuss later). Fëanor created the Silmarils due to his skill, which exceeded anyone else's. Thus, they became his property. You might argue that the light (of the trees) belonged to the Valar. But the Valar welcomed the Eldar into their land, for them to enjoy it as much as themselves, did they not ? Was it said, in any part of the Silmarillion, that the Eldar cannot touch or use elements of it ? No. They made homes in it and used that land as they sought fit. The Valar did not oppose it. Let's say you have an artist who, out of an ordinary piece of wood, makes a beautiful sculpture. Would you blame him for claiming it later? I wouldn't. Thus, in my mind, Fëanor was the only rightful owner of the Silmarils. Of course, he might have given them to the Valar as a gift, after the two trees were consumed by Ungoliant. But that was entirely his decision. He chose not to and that led to the Oath, in some part. I do not blame the sons from keeping the Oath either. All great men keep their promises, as the saying goes. The killings that took place because of this were sad parts of the tale, that I agree. But wouldn't have been easier just to give them their jewels back? Why did Thingol had to claim one of them? Why did Elwing considered she had any right on the one she temporary possessed when fleeing with it? Isn't it strange that all these characters wanted a hold of the Silmarills and couldn't let go of them, just like Melkor? Now who is the pure and honest elf here? :) The only event with whom I don't approve is: The Kinslaying (only the first one!). This decision was taken by Fëanor and by far his darkest. But still quite insufficient to shadow my admiration for him and his kind. In the end, my friend, I would like to point out, as I'm sure you are aware of, that it is easier to agree with characters that we identify with, thus we are all likely to become biased. :) I know I am. Thank you for taking the time to read my reply and I wish to you a lovely day ahead! ~~ Þelma 10:12, 28 June 2008 (EDT)
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. Coming up with a rationale to defend Fëanor is a tough job indeed. You might have missed your calling as a defense attorney. If you look at my page, you'll see that I've become the TG's war specialist over the past six months, particularly Elder Days and FA stuff. Check out some of the articles. Also, I set up the Feature Article process off of the Main Page, and you might want to take a look and vote for one of the nominated articles. --Theoden1 10:29, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Time Zones

GMT is the standard, of course ;-) ~ Earendilyon 10:20, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Ecthelion

Great job. Just a few things (about my contributions to the etymology). First, you asked yourself (in the edit summary) how you could've forgotten to link Tolkien's name. Well, you didn't. I did. Also, I forgot to add the source, which you, by the looks of it, also fixed. Just one problem: "Maeglin" does not direct to the chapter "Maeglin", but to the character. Usually, chapters from HoMe are not linked, but if you were to link this one, maybe a redlink (and a subsequent stub) "[[Maeglin (chapter)|Maeglin]]" would be better? -- Ederchil 07:38, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

1. Thank you, glad you like it. :) 2. I knew that you wrote that part in the Etymologies section, but since I was expanding the article, it was my responsibility to check all that was written in it, and that included the links. So this is why I said what I said. 3. Now about your observation, it is true and I was aware of it as well. I knew the link wasn't quite accurate, but I remembered what happened the last time I created an article out of the desire not to have red links...you know, the door affair ;) and I said "let's just leave it like this for the moment". Of course, the moment turned into days. But now that you pointed out, time to change it. If you wish to modify it yourself, please go ahead. If not, I will do it, but only later tonight. 4. And since you're here, I want to ask you about Orcrist: "Some have speculated that Orcrist, mentioned in The Hobbit, was Ecthelion's sword." I didn't write this, but didn't deleted it either. So, what do you think? It's speculation at its best. Should we keep it in the article? There is no clear proof of it... On the other hand, I can see the reasons behind it... ~~ Þelma 09:36, 16 July 2008 (EDT)
You can edit Maeglin if you like. As for Orcrist, the speculation appears to be there from the beginning, three years ago. Bad links (such as "Elves (Middle-earth)") suggest it was a wiki-rip, but Wikipedia's current article has it deleted. Since I already overhauled Glamdring, I might just overhaul Orcrist as well - don't know yet. I have never really researched the meaning of "mate" here, so it could mean anything, even that Turgon wielded two swords... You don't have to include it in Ecthelion. -- Ederchil 09:54, 16 July 2008 (EDT)
You know, I'd rather believe that. I mean, if Turgon had a "mate" for the great Glamdring, why would he gave it to Ecthelion and not keep it for himself? Alas, we will never know for sure. For now, I will remove it from Ecthelion until and if more evidence is brought. Will edit Maeglin too. ~~ Þelma 15:07, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Houses of Gondolin

I see you implemented the navbox in your revision of House of the King. However, I've made a template for that. Simply add {{Template:HousesofGondolin}} at the bottom of articles. -- Ederchil 14:18, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

LOL. Bet it's much easier than the copy/paste I'm doing now...Thank you. :) ~~ 14:29, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

[edit] "Missed one"

Considering you worked all through the night on Númenóreans, I can hardly blame you. There are still a couple of typos of course, but they'll get fixed someday. -- Ederchil 03:53, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

Thank you for understanding :) I did some tweaks now, but there must be still some corrections to be done. I have to find the way to include the auto spelling function in the IE browser because that would be a big help for future edits. :) ~~ Þelma 04:00, 28 July 2008 (EDT)
A couple I noticed: "twenty five" is spelled "twenty-five", and there's no need for spaces in front of colons. -- Ederchil 04:02, 28 July 2008 (EDT)
Corrected. :) ~~ Þelma 04:11, 28 July 2008 (EDT)


[edit] Admin Nom

I nominated our worthy colleague Ederchil for adminship. I hope you'll support him, for we do need a second admin around here; he's certainly earned it.--Theoden1 22:02, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Familytrees

If you plan to place the excessively wide Finarfin one, you might want to check Bolger Family#Bolger Family Tree - I thought that layout worked better. -- Ederchil 15:32, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

I like the second :) -- Ederchil 16:51, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
I was writing to you that I prefer the second variant, when it told me that there is an edit conflict. And there you go, you like 2nd too. :) Perfect. :) ~~ Þelma 16:58, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Meetings

Hi Þelma! I just wanted to draw your attention to here. We are currently discussing the idea of a weekly site meeting. Thanks!-- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  18:11, 7 August 2008 (EDT)

Hi, KA! Thank you for letting me know. All the best! ~~ Þelma 03:53, 8 August 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Vacation

Could you let us know at what date you plan to return? Kinda like "This user is on vacation until Month Dayth". -- Ederchil 16:59, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll be in and out of the capital for the next month. So it's best to say I do not have a certain date. The best I can give you is late September. But if this is about those claimed tags with my name on them, by all means, I won't be upset if you consider they should be taken off. I wouldn't want to keep them for myself and not do any work on them for a while. Take care! :) ~~ Þelma 17:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
It's more so we know when you will be visiting meetings again. Most claimed articles haven't had work in a while. -- Ederchil 17:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Amrod and Amras

I've come to the conclusion some time ago that the names of the twin sons of Fëanor have got seriously mixed up, and as a result the two articles are largely under the wrong name. I've given my reasons at length on their Talk pages, but have not done anything about it, nor has anyone else.

Because another editor has now, unwittingly, been adding to the confusion, I think the time has come to make the necessary changes. But as you have been doing serious work on the Sons of Fëanor about a year ago, I would appreciate your opinion before I do anything drastic, on the articles’ Talk pages and/or my own. — Mithrennaith 06:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Meeting - Sunday 5th September

Hi, Þelma! Just a quick message to inform you that we are holding our next Meeting on Sunday, 5th September 2010 at 7pm UTC. Whether you are or aren't able to attend, please sign your name on the here. Hope to see you on Sunday! --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 17:59, 30 August 2010 (UTC)