TheOneRing.net was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 18 May 2020 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Tolkien fandom. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien, his legendarium, and related topics. Please visit the project talk page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles.Middle-earthWikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earthTemplate:WikiProject Middle-earthTolkien articles
Note: Though it states in the Guide to writing better articles that generally fictional articles should be written in present tense, all Tolkien legendarium-related articles that cover in-universe material before the current action must be written in past tense. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards for more information about this and other article standards.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media franchises, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to media franchises on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Media franchisesWikipedia:WikiProject Media franchisesTemplate:WikiProject Media franchisesmedia franchise articles
The Tolkien fandom article is currently pretty tiny, and it seems like this topic can easily be merged there with no loss of information, especially since the Context section is essentially duplicated.
Since the article talks about fan films and other media rather than just fan fiction, the section can be renamed "fan works" and have "fan fiction" as just one subsection. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, this is a large subject, just begun; and the small selection of the many citations available that are already there prove that it is separately notable. Even at its length when you saw it, 1,700 words excluding the lead (over 4 pages of A4 printout), it would already have been a very uncomfortable WP:COATRACK fit for Tolkien fandom. Since then it has been developed to 3,400 words, more than in your proposed merge target (which is 2,400 words).
Further, the proposed target article has quite a different subject, namely the history of fan activities, rather than the literary qualities of fan writing and the challenges that it faces. The article would in no way benefit from such a merge; instead, we have the simplicity and convenience of one article for one topic, another article for another. I placed the short summary of the fan fiction article into the fandom article, with "main" link, precisely not to unbalance that article.
There's no such thing as a "driveby nomination" for merge or AfD. It's just a nomination. You are free to disagree and it certainly looks like it will fail, but you don't have to accuse others of WP:BADFAITH while doing it. Doing so gives heavy vibes of ownership.
The article has been expanded a lot since the nomination but it is concerning that parts of it seem to be "padding" to make it seem massive. The "copyright" section can essentially apply to all fanfiction, and all the blockquotes in the article don't seem to be necessary, those particular passages are not the subject of analysis. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no "padding" of any sort. Part of the Copyright section obviously has wider applicability, but it is specifically applied to Ring of Darkness and The Last Ringbearer, with multiple citations that discuss those two particular Tolkien fan fiction cases. The quotations are there to give the general reader an idea of the materials that are discussed, selected to fit the cited scholarly analysis. For instance the 'Letters from Bree' snippet is specifically from the story that is analysed in the text beside it. As for talk of massiveness, that is simply pejorative, and no editor should be going there. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
