alt.fan.tolkien

Louis Epstein wrote: > At Wikipedia,a user known as "Chiswick Chap" has taken it upon > itself to enforce that site's ludicrous rules on articles affecting > Tolkien,claiming to have "scoured and renewed",with a link to their > article on the chapter "The Scouring of the Shire",much of the > Tolkien coverage. > > In the furtherance of their pathetic "Must Not be Invented Here Syndrome" > (obsessed with publishing only things regurgitated from elsewhere rather > than anything of independent value),he refuses to allow simple observations > of obvious differences between the Bakshi film and the books,such as > Legolas being the Elf the hobbits meet en route to Rivendell rather > than Glorfindel,or Saruman being intermittently called "Aruman" and > robed in red,in a section ostensibly listing differences between the > book and film...immediately deleting an edit as "unsourced" (the film > and book themselves are the best sources possible) and deleting a > remonstration on his talk page as "abuse of his talk page". Well, then, find a source. Here's one a 30-second search turned up: https://www.tor.com/2020/01/31/ralph-bakshis-the-lord-of-the-rings-brought-tolkien-from-counterculture-to-the-mainstream/ -- Jeff

In rec.arts.books.tolkien Julian Bradfield wrote: > On 2022-02-06, Louis Epstein wrote: >>> In the furtherance of their pathetic "Must Not be Invented Here Syndrome" >>> (obsessed with publishing only things regurgitated from elsewhere rather >>> than anything of independent value),he refuses to allow simple observations > > If you don't understand why Wikipedia works as it does, perhaps you > should just not care about it. It is better to stay angry and create a superior alternative. (What justifications they offer are insufficient...it's not a matter of not understanding,but of not forgiving). > The prohibition of primary research is of course irritating - I'm an > expert on quite a lot of (genuine technical) things, but I still can't > write on them other than by citing published work. And this is completely unjustifiable... The Tolkien book and the film adaptation are both "published works" and that they differ in a particular way is a matter of evident fact that should not be treated as needing any further verification. > However, it does have an obvious purpose: if something is stated on > Wikipedia, you should be able to trace it to a reputable published > source, not some random loony on the Internet. Sometimes one can know better than a "reputable published source" (I trust the CEO of a company with an article as to where its name came from over the story his grandfather the founder told a prominent newspaper they quote in the article). Sometimes information is so widely distributed that the supposed citation of a "source" is entirely an act of arbitrary bias. If all you have is what other people have already said, nobody needs what you have to say,just your bibliography. > Those of who use Wikipidia professionally (I tell all my students that > it's a very valuable resource) appreciate that it doesn't allow > "primary research" - otherwise the articles on, say, NP-completeness > or Goedel incompleteness would be full of stuff by crackpots claiming > to have solved/refuted them. As I said,I would like to create a fork that only I can edit (though others can PROPOSE edits for my review).I would be putting back a lot of unjustly deleted articles and overturning a lot of biased policies. -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

On 2022-02-06, Louis Epstein wrote: >> In the furtherance of their pathetic "Must Not be Invented Here Syndrome" >> (obsessed with publishing only things regurgitated from elsewhere rather >> than anything of independent value),he refuses to allow simple observations If you don't understand why Wikipedia works as it does, perhaps you should just not care about it. The prohibition of primary research is of course irritating - I'm an expert on quite a lot of (genuine technical) things, but I still can't write on them other than by citing published work. However, it does have an obvious purpose: if something is stated on Wikipedia, you should be able to trace it to a reputable published source, not some random loony on the Internet. Those of who use Wikipidia professionally (I tell all my students that it's a very valuable resource) appreciate that it doesn't allow "primary research" - otherwise the articles on, say, NP-completeness or Goedel incompleteness would be full of stuff by crackpots claiming to have solved/refuted them.

I periodically post on this header to reflect on the evolving standing of the reign of the present British monarch (still the only one in whose reign TLotR has been in print,and already first in line when even The Hobbit was published) in relation to the hereditary titleholders of Arda. Her Majesty now completes seventy years of reign,definitively surpassing Ar-Sakalthor of Numenor and drawing abreast of Arveleg II of Arnor and his descendant Aranuir,Chieftain of the Dunedain.Aldor the Old remains the only ruler of Rohan to have lived or reigned longer but his margin by both measures shrinks by the day as the Queen leaves Eomer ever further behind. Named hereditary titleholders of Arda reigning between 60 and 100 years: Thorin I 99 years Nain II 97 Arantar 96 Gloin 96 Thorin II 91 Eldacar (Arnor) 90 Cemendur 90 Tar-Calmacil 88 Tarondor (Arnor) 87 Anardil 87 Earendil 86 Amlaith 85 Earendur 84 Faramir 84 Beleg 83 Tarannon Falastur 83 Siriondil 82 Mallor 81 Celepharn 81 Celebrindor 81 Argeleb II 81 Ostoher 81 Atanatar I 81 Hyarmendacil II 81 Tarcil 80 Araphor 80 Calimehtar 80 Ciryandil 79 Tar-Palantir 78 Araval 78 Dain II 78 Cirion 78 Malvegil 77 Atanatar II 77 Ar-Gimilzor 75 Aldor the Old 75 Tar-Ardamin 74 Arvegil 73 Araphant 73 Aravir 72 Gerontius 72 Ar-Zimrathon 71 Arahael 71 Arveleg II 70 Aranuir 70 Ar-Sakalthor 69 Arahad I 68 Narmacil I 68 Aravorn 66 Valacar 66 Aragost 65 Arahad II 65 Arassuil 65 Eomer 65 Ar-Pharazon 64 Arathorn I 64 Argonui 64 Ar-Adunakhor 63 Romendacil II 62 (after 64 years as regent) Belecthor II 61 Gondor's Eldacar reigned only 58 years de jure and 48 de facto.Gondor's Tarondor reigned 162 years. Lifespans between 90 years and the 130 of the Old Took, Argeleb I of Arnor,and the Steward Belegorn: Hallas 125 years Earnur 122 Barahir 122 Telemnar 120 Mardil 120 Hurin I 120 Belecthor II 120 Faramir 120 Pelendur 119 Cirion 118 Eradan 117 Egalmoth 117 Turin I 113 Hurin II 113 Herion 111 Beregond 111 Angelimir 111 Arvedui 110 Arador 110 Belecthor I 110 Orodreth 109 Beren 108 Dior 107 Rorimac Brandybuck 106 Aglahad 105 Fortinbras I 103 Gorbadoc Brandybuck 103 Denethor I 102 Isengrim II 102 Fortinbras II 102 Gormadoc Brandybuck 102 Madoc Brandybuck 102 Aldor the Old 101 Isumbras IV 101 Paladin II 101 Elphir 101 Arveleg I 100 Aragorn I 100 Thorondir 100 Ferumbras II 100 Imrahil 100 Turin II 99 Ferumbras III 99 Alphros 99 Ecthelion I 98 Turgon 98 Ecthelion II 98 Isengrim III 98 Isumbras III 93 Marmadoc Brandybuck 93 Eomer 93 Saradoc Brandybuck 92 -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

[adding intended crosspost] Louis Epstein wrote: > At Wikipedia,a user known as "Chiswick Chap" has taken it upon > itself to enforce that site's ludicrous rules on articles affecting > Tolkien,claiming to have "scoured and renewed",with a link to their > article on the chapter "The Scouring of the Shire",much of the > Tolkien coverage. > > In the furtherance of their pathetic "Must Not be Invented Here Syndrome" > (obsessed with publishing only things regurgitated from elsewhere rather > than anything of independent value),he refuses to allow simple observations > of obvious differences between the Bakshi film and the books,such as > Legolas being the Elf the hobbits meet en route to Rivendell rather > than Glorfindel,or Saruman being intermittently called "Aruman" and > robed in red,in a section ostensibly listing differences between the > book and film...immediately deleting an edit as "unsourced" (the film > and book themselves are the best sources possible) and deleting a > remonstration on his talk page as "abuse of his talk page". > > Scouring of the Shire,indeed. > "If I hear 'Not Allowed' much oftener..." > > Well,I'm now on a TEN YEAR ban from there,given my defiance of > other biases and policies...and Tolkien-specific wikis have been > intermittent on accepting my contributions...but I am considering > creating a proper fork for sane editing. > > -=-=- > The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, > at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

At Wikipedia,a user known as "Chiswick Chap" has taken it upon itself to enforce that site's ludicrous rules on articles affecting Tolkien,claiming to have "scoured and renewed",with a link to their article on the chapter "The Scouring of the Shire",much of the Tolkien coverage. In the furtherance of their pathetic "Must Not be Invented Here Syndrome" (obsessed with publishing only things regurgitated from elsewhere rather than anything of independent value),he refuses to allow simple observations of obvious differences between the Bakshi film and the books,such as Legolas being the Elf the hobbits meet en route to Rivendell rather than Glorfindel,or Saruman being intermittently called "Aruman" and robed in red,in a section ostensibly listing differences between the book and film...immediately deleting an edit as "unsourced" (the film and book themselves are the best sources possible) and deleting a remonstration on his talk page as "abuse of his talk page". Scouring of the Shire,indeed. "If I hear 'Not Allowed' much oftener..." Well,I'm now on a TEN YEAR ban from there,given my defiance of other biases and policies...and Tolkien-specific wikis have been intermittent on accepting my contributions...but I am considering creating a proper fork for sane editing. -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

snowfleck wrote: > On Sat, 8 Jan 2022 03:49:51 -0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein > wrote: >> Let the Thrones of the Valar endure!! > > Didn't the valar chose their gender or physical form according to > their own individual preference? Or is that the thin end misreading > of a radical subversive wedge? > >> I am a strong believer in the tale told once,"set out fair and > square >> without contradictions" > > The history of middle-earth series point to constant iteration and > reimagination. Isn't that's a lot of shifting sand upon which to lay > a singular foundation? Best to look at it as sands slowly swept away to reveal an enduring stone foundation. -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

On Sat, 8 Jan 2022 03:49:51 -0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein wrote: > Let the Thrones of the Valar endure!! Didn't the valar chose their gender or physical form according to their own individual preference? Or is that the thin end misreading of a radical subversive wedge? > I am a strong believer in the tale told once,"set out fair and square > without contradictions" The history of middle-earth series point to constant iteration and reimagination. Isn't that's a lot of shifting sand upon which to lay a singular foundation?

snowfleck wrote: > On Sun, 3 Oct 2021 03:05:29 -0000 (UTC), Louis Epstein > wrote: >> Disturbing to hear that the UK's longstanding Tolkien Society >> has decided to embrace modernistic mentalities anathema to the >> traditionalist ethos the reverent reader should imbibe from the >> Arda canon. > > It might be an odd point to make on usenet but why shouldn't the > tolkien society move with the times? Because doing so is intrinsically indefensible. > The old guard won't live forever Let the Thrones of the Valar endure!! > so reaching out to an alternative fan base is a necessity. I am a strong believer in the tale told once,"set out fair and square without contradictions",and want the narrative to bring those who need to be cured of their tendencies to be "an alternative fan base" into the fold of the permanently-sole fan base.If reading TLotR doesn't mold you toward monarchism you're not getting what you should out of it. -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

Posting-Frequency: Monthly (FAQ also posted monthly) Welcome to the Tolkien newsgroups! Our FAQs can be found at: http://tolkien.slimy.com/ Even if you haven't read all of /The Hobbit/ and /The Lord of the Rings/, you are welcome here, but be careful! Spoilers for the stories can be anywhere, even in the subject line of a message. To help you join our community as comfortably as possible, we do ask that you read our Frequently Asked Questions lists before posting. The FAQs discuss proper "netiquette" for participating in discussions here, and also introduce the basics of our most frequent debates (the main Meta-FAQ page lists the most "important" questions in bold). Once again, welcome! We look forward to your participation.