Talk:Noldor/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: TompaDompa (talk · contribs) 05:03, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this. TompaDompa (talk) 05:03, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:05, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General comments[edit]

  • This is not necessary to meet the WP:Good article criteria, but I think the diagram of the Sundering of the Elves would be helpful to the reader, so I would suggest including it somewhere.
    • I'll consider it. I made it for the article you name, and as it's both quite large and quite technical, it isn't an automatic choice for other articles. The Sundering is of course illustrated in the infographic File:Elvish_Migrations_and_Kindreds.svg which is already in this article. I think we're best off without the other diagram as well.
  • Verb tense is inconsistent – the Noldor variously "are" and "were", for instance.
    • Fixed, I hope.
      • Hm. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction recommends the use of the present tense, but I see that Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth has separate recommendations about tense use (Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards#Tenses). I'll ask at WT:GAN for someone else to take a look just to be sure.
        The article now mainly uses the past tense, but not exclusively. There is some mixed use (Their hair colour was usually a very dark shade of brown; Tolkien hesitated over whether their hair might be black. Red and even white ("silver") hair occasionally exist among some individuals. and In The Fellowship of the Ring Frodo meets a band of Elves led by Gildor Inglorion from the House of Finrod who were travelling to the Grey Havens., emphasis added) and some present tense (Fëanor is pure Noldor, and so excellent as a craftsman, but his half-brothers Fingolfin and Finarfin have Vanyar blood from their mother, Indis. They are accordingly less skilful as craftsmen). TompaDompa (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • It may be helpful to note that the mythological materials in The Silmarillion are intentionally (on Tolkien's part) far more distant than the Third Age action of The Lord of the Rings, which itself was meant to be "in the distant past", so the tales of the Noldor are given in the pluperfect tense, as it were: the reader is meant to be seeing them through the lens of later chroniclers and archivists (in Tolkien's frame stories). So I think the past tense is the right choice here. I've made fixes accordingly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article is to my eye a bit light on the significance of the Noldor as distinguished from the Elves more generally or individuals such as Fëanor. I think it's important to make it clear to the reader why this is a topic worth covering separately. Eden's mention that The Silmarillion focuses mainly on the Noldor is a good start and might be worth including in the lead. Dickerson also notes The Noldor are thus the only Eldar to return to Middle-earth and to become important in its subsequent history.. I'm aware that this will probably lead to some inevitable scope overlap with Sundering of the Elves.
    • Added.
      • I would prefer even more, but I think this is sufficient. The added stuff in the WP:LEAD is unsourced there and not in the body either, but of course I know where it comes from and that it's not original research. Think about whether there is a good place in the body to include it so others can see where it comes from, too. TompaDompa (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lead[edit]

  • The "Kings of the Noldor" link in the inbox goes nowhere.
    • Removed.
  • New comment after the initial review: a kindred of High Elves – why "High Elves" rather than just "Elves"? The linked page does not really offer an explanation.
    • Removed. Just Elves will do fine here, Tolkien's classification of Elves is subject-matter for many PhDs.
  • I would probably clarify that Quenya is a fictional/constructed language.
    • Done.
  • migrated to Valinor from Middle-earth and lived in Eldamar, the coastal region of Aman, a continent that lay west of Middle-earth – this is rather dense. Four fictional geographic locations are mentioned, of which two are explained. I would at minimum gloss all locations that are mentioned with at least a single-word descriptor (country/city/continent/region/river/lake/mountain/et cetera). I also don't know that mentioning Eldamar is really necessary here, so if removing that makes it easier to make the sentence easier to read and understand, that's always an option. That being said, there's plenty of room to make the lead longer rather than shorter (in general).
    • Done.
  • on the instigation of Finwë's eldest son Fëanor – this refers to the return to Beleriand but could be parsed as referring to the killing of Finwë.
    • Rewritten.
  • I would probably mention and link Sundering of the Elves in the lead.
    • Done.

Etymology[edit]

  • Notes on heraldry seem a bit out of place in an etymology section, no?
    • Moved.
  • New comment after the initial review: by Teleri of Tol Eressëa – I think that should have a definite article ("the Teleri"). Also gloss.
    • Done.

Attributes[edit]

  • the Vala Aulë – I would link Valar in Middle-earth here at first mention rather than in the next section.
  • The Noldor primarily spoke Quenya as their first language, though the Exiles in Middle-earth would also speak Sindarin, a Quenya term for the language of the Sindar ("grey people" in Quenya), a kindred of Elves who initially accepted the summons of the Valar but never completed the journey to Valinor, and remained in Middle-earth as a prominent civilization. – I don't find all of this in the cited source?
    • And most of it is off-topic, removed the gloss, and cited the basic facts.
  • I would link Fëanor at first mention (after the lead).
    • Done.

Fictional history[edit]

  • swore a terrible oath of vengeance – I would either remove "terrible" or replace it with a different adjective that comes off as less of a value judgment.
    • Done. We could equally well cite it to scholars such as Shippey.
  • In Alqualondë – gloss.
    • Done.
  • from Angband – gloss.
    • Done.
  • Fingon, the eldest son of Fingolfin, saved Maedhros – I would state their relationship here (i.e. "his half-cousin Maedhros" or similar).
    • Done.
  • Fingolfin, who became the first High King of the Noldor – the caption for Finwë's emblem refers to him as High King, so that's a contradiction since he was of course long dead by then. Might it be possible to clarify the King/High King distinction somewhere in the article?
    • Fixed. I think the glosses in the House of Finwë are probably sufficient on the distinction.
  • The rest of his brothers – I'm guessing this refers to Maedhros' brothers, the sons of Fëanor? It could be interpreted as Fingolfin's brothers.
    • Yes, the sons of Fëanor. Fixed.
  • in Dagor Aglareb – gloss.
    • Done.
  • betrayed by the Easterlings – that's the Easterlings (First Age) (defunct since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Easterlings (First Age)), right?
    • Yes, removed the link.
  • by Gothmog – gloss.
    • Done.
  • Gil-galad, son of Orodreth – that contradicts the family tree.
    • Fixed.
  • Between the years 545–583 – do not mix en dashes with between (MOS:ENDASH).
    • Fixed.
  • Ar-Pharazôn's rebellion – gloss. It is not clear from reading this that Ar-Pharazôn is a person (as opposed to a group, for instance).
    • Glossed.
  • Gil-galad set out for Mordor in the Last Alliance of Elves and Men – I would link Last Alliance of Elves and Men.
    • Linked.
  • Galadriel and other Half-elven – "other" Half-elven?
    • Fixed.

House of Finwë[edit]

  • The Sons of Fëanor were Maedhros, Maglor, Celegorm, Curufin, Caranthir, Amras, and Amrod. – if this is the order in which they were born, I would state that.
    • Done.
  • I would link Tolkien scholar.
    • Linked.

Analysis[edit]

  • Children of Ilúvatar – gloss.
    • Added.
      • I probably should have been more clear. I meant gloss "Ilúvatar". TompaDompa (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • Hm, well, "the Children of Ilúvatar" is already a gloss, and the name is already wikilinked, so I think we've gone in easily deep enough there (we can't gloss the glosses). Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:28, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
          • I see your point. Might it perhaps be possible to mention and gloss Ilúvatar elsewhere in the article (perhaps in the first paragraph of the "Fictional history" section, where the Awakening of the Elves is mentioned)? Ilúvatar is included in the infobox as the creator of the Noldor but no further details on this are included in the article. TompaDompa (talk) 13:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
            • Done.
  • Who is Leslie A. Donovan?
    • Glossed.
  • Shippey writes [...] possessiveness. – this is a very long sentence that gets a bit difficult to parse.
    • Divided.
  • Bradford Lee Eden – a Tolkien scholar, right? I would mention that.
    • Glossed.
  • The Tolkien scholar Matthew Dickerson writes that the theft of the Silmarils by Morgoth leads Fëanor and his sons into swearing their dreadful oath and leading the Noldor out of Valinor back to Middle-earth, at once a free choice and an exile. – this seems... incomplete? Maybe there's something I'm missing.
    • Edited.

In culture[edit]

  • Do sources on the Noldor discuss the album? If not, this may belong at the article about the album but not here.
    • I'd have thought the primary statement that the album (extensively) mentions the Noldor is sufficient to make this worth mentioning. Of course a further discussion would be nice, but familiarity with power metal is asking a lot of the scholars!
      • Sources on the album can only demonstrate that the Noldor is a WP:MAJORASPECT of the album, not that the album is a major aspect of the Noldor. In other words, only that the Noldor is worth mentioning at the Nightfall in Middle-Earth article, not that the album is worth mentioning at the Noldor article. Cultural references to a topic are not supposed to be included just because they exist, but only if sources on the topic being referenced deem them to be noteworthy. The broader topic of music based on Tolkien's works appears to be covered at Works inspired by J. R. R. Tolkien#Music and Music of Middle-earth#Based on Tolkien's works, which would seem to suggest that scholarly sources exist (or else that those sections have been written despite a lack of scholarly sources). It also appears that the album is more about The Silmarillion in general than the Noldor specifically, so that might be a more appropriate place to cover it. TompaDompa (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • Added a description and scholarly quote. Nice to see a scholar engaging with the younger generation via his students' opinions of power metal.
  • The URL is dead.
    • Added archive.

Summary[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    Some copyediting is needed. This has now been done.
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    I'm unsure about the WP:WAF, as noted above. I'll ask at WT:GAN. This has now been addressed.
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    All sources are, as far as I can tell, reliable for the material they are cited for.
    C. It contains no original research:
    Spotchecking revealed one instance where I couldn't verify the material from the cited source. See above. Since fixed.
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
    Earwig gives a couple of false positives where the copying was clearly done in the opposite direction. Spotchecking reveals no instances of unacceptably WP:Close paraphrasing.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    An aspect that immediately stands out as missing is the real-world history of the creation and development of the Noldor. Since addressed. More would be better, but this is sufficient.
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
    The "In culture" section is dubious. It either needs better sourcing or removal. Better sourcing has been provided.
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
    No obvious neutrality issues. Opinions are clearly distinguished from facts and attributed as appropriate.
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    All images are CC BY 4.0, CC BY-SA 3.0, or CC BY-SA 4.0 (the last one being fine for media but not for text per WP:CFAQ).
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    It should be possible to address these issues fairly quickly. Yep.

Ping Chiswick Chap. TompaDompa (talk) 16:07, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TompaDompa - many thanks for useful and varied comments. I believe that's all fixed now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:38, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap: I have added strikethrough markup to resolved issues, added a couple of additional ones I spotted, replied to some of your comments, done some formatting fixes per WP:INDENTMIX and the such above, and updated the summary. TompaDompa (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that just about covers it. I'll wait for someone to weigh in at WT:GAN#Verb tense at Noldor before closing this as successful, just to be sure. Great job! TompaDompa (talk) 15:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Having now received some feedback at WT:GAN#Verb tense at Noldor, I'll ask that verb tense be brought in line with MOS:WTW, i.e. present tense. Ping Chiswick Chap. TompaDompa (talk) 22:15, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:18, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Great! I did some final copyediting myself, and will now pass the article. TompaDompa (talk) 18:46, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Noldor/GA1&oldid=1129498190"