Talk:The Fellowship of the Ring

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Fellowship of the Ring)
Article milestones
January 27, 2020Articles for deletionKept
On this day...A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 29, 2006.

Structure table[edit]

The 'Structure' section is supported by a table, which performs several functions. It identifies the distinctive flashback-narration chapters, and their narrators; it shows the similarity in structure of the two books in the volume; and it visually sets the flashback chapters in context with lists of the preceding and following chapters, illustrating their equally distinctive long single narrative thread (in the context of the rest of The Lord of the Rings), serving to indicate just how unusual they are in position and relative quantity. None of this can readily be brought out in a block of text, which conveys just one visual message, "there is a block of stuff". For readers who appreciate articles visually, tables, maps, diagrams, photographs, infographics, and even infoboxes offer ways into a subject – English may not be their first language, or they may 'think visually' – which words alone do not offer. This would seem to be more than enough justification for the table. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:18, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First of all, thank you for the courtesy of fitting deed to word by starting the discussion.
It's ironic that you cite visual communication as the reason you undid my edit, as that was the exact reason I made it. I thought that as the information is quite simple and easily conveyed via text that the table was merely repeating what had already been said, while marginalising the text and making it harder to read. The hatnote also looked odd in such a short section.
My original thought was that as this was essentially a de gustibus matter, there was no point in discussion, but I tried putting the table under the text and removing floatright, which made it easier for me to read - what do you think? CohenTheBohemian (talk) 13:50, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks; certainly not my job per WP:BRD but it seemed advisable given the unknown quantity involved. Let's try the formatting you propose; since you ask my opinion, it's certainly worse on a large screen, and will make no difference on a mobile one; perhaps for those with some intermediate-sized gadget, it will appear better. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:13, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A quick thought: skin makes a big difference here. The article looks better in 2010 because the display space is wider; could that be part of the issue? CohenTheBohemian (talk) 05:57, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In that case, beyond my pay grade. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:09, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Are Elf, Dwarf, Hobbit, etc. capitalized or not? Because the text is currently inconsistent. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:48, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should be, I'll have a go now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:53, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hobbit isn't capitalised, here and in Hobbit. What gives? Clarityfiend (talk)
Feel free, capitalise away. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:05, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]