Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's

talk page or in a deletion review

). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Consensus is at least to not cover this as a separate article. There is no consensus whether to redirect this title or where to; editors can continue discussing this on an appropriate talk page. Sandstein 08:45, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen

The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This story is a small part of the appendix of The Lord of the Rings. The topic of the story is covered much more thoroughly in the articles on the characters of Aragorn and Arwen. BenKuykendall (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. BenKuykendall (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. BenKuykendall (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. (The appendix is bursting with unnotable details.) Clarityfiend (talk) 19:35, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I found an article titled "'Her Choice Was Made and Her Doom Appointed'Tragedy and Divine Comedy in the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen" I couldn't access and a college term paper.
  WP:GNG fail. Hog Farm (talk) 05:15, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • The article you are looking for is listed here. It is "'Her Choice Was Made and Her Doom Appointed': Tragedy and Divine Comedy in the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen" by Richard C. West, published in The Lord of the Rings 1954-2004 (2006). I (and others) will have a copy of such books (though mine are mostly packed away at the moment), so please do ask. The irony is that this is the most important of the Appendices, and it talked about more than any of the others. But material on that is probably best placed elsewhere, rather than in its own article. Carcharoth (talk) 15:51, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to The Lord of the Rings. I'm not sure about the subject's notability by itself, but it's in the appendix of LOTR and it seems like a valid enough search term to redirect to that book. — Hunter Kahn 12:36, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arwen is a much more specific (qua, better) redirect target. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:08, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete we do not need freestanding articles on the contents of the apendicies, and they are not really worth being redirects either. That this has existed over 14 years with only primary sources is a sign of how we have failed to clense Wikipedia of the initial mistakes in its creation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:25, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Suggestion (semi-serious) - merge
  Galadriel and Celeborn and Eärendil and Elwing for existing examples. Carcharoth (talk) 14:47, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Those other two pairs normally act in concert. True, Earendil normally went sailing without his wife, but their sailing together was key. Arwen may have made Aragorn's banner, but she did not accompany him in the Fellowship or go to Minas Terith in his first battle.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:06, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Whatever the outcome, the title should Redirect to Arwen where it is discussed. The principle should be that we do our best to find a sensible "home" for plausible search terms, which this story title certainly is. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:07, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:XY issue. The store belongs to neither Aragorn nor Arwen alone, so I think it would be strange to redirect to either of them. BenKuykendall (talk) 16:35, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Good point. I'll think about this, we may be making a mistake here. Google Scholar turns up some 70 papers on the Tale, confirming Carcharoth's note on its importance among scholars, so perhaps the right answer is to say it's notable, and to rewrite the article using some of them. I'll look into it tomorrow. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:52, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nominator. - FitIndia ^{Talk Commons} 15:22, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No coverage by multiple independent reliable sources to meet
  WP:GNG and justify a stand alone article. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 21:15, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Redirect to The Lord of the Rings is the most appropriate decision. Patrickbetzig (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's

talk page or in a deletion review

). No further edits should be made to this page.