Talk:All that is gold does not glitter

Contrast

 * Seek for the Sword that was broken:
 * In Imladris it dwells;
 * There shall be counsels taken
 * Stronger than Morgul-spells.
 * There shall be shown a token
 * That Doom is near at hand,
 * For Isildur's Bane shall waken.
 * And the Halfling forth shall stand

Rich  Farmbrough. 00:15, 17 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Nice. Why not post it as a new page? --GwydionM 15:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Page name
The capitalisation is non-standard, it should be All that is gold does not glitter. I'm inclined to move it, but I'd first like to give other people the chance to express an opinion. --GwydionM 15:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree. -Phoenixrod 08:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree. This version is irregular; it's not valid as title case nor as WP title style. Chris Loosley 04:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Official name?
"From the 50th anniversary edition of 2005, the new, enlarged index by Wayne G. Hammond and Christina Scull list it as All that is gold does not glitter, which must now be considered as the official name."

Must it? Why? TheMadBaron 12:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Stub Status
What is left to do for this article to remove the stub status? I'm thinking that it might be possible to take this article, along with other articles about various LotR poetry, and form a single unified page for all such poetic work? Sighter Goliant 14:58, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * There is already a category. Better one page per poem, they have different connections.  --GwydionM 16:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

"Not all who wander are lost"
Is this poem the original source of the line 'Not all (those) who wander are lost' ? It sounds almost Biblical to me but I can't find any earlier source. AKM (talk) 21:28, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I've been searching for the same thing. I seem to find it attributed to several sources but none that I've been able to verify. More recently it is coming up as an attribution to JK Rowling, something Dumbledore says in one of the Harry Potter Books... (without THOSE), again I can't verify this, and if it is in there, I think it should be mentioned as well as any info on if she is trying to directly quote or give a nod to Tolkien. --Spriteyone (talk) 03:13, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Logical Conversion
Nice article on this poem. However, I noticed that the opening line of Tolkien's poem ("All that is gold does not glitter") isn't technically a logical converse of Shakespeare's line "All that glisters is not gold". I followed the link to conversion and on that page is a chart of propositions and their converses. According to that chart Shakespeare's line would be of type 'O' - "Some S is not P". As the chart indicates, there is not a logical converse for this type of proposition. Furthermore, the definition cited for conversion indicates that a conversion is a type of immediate inference, but one cannot draw an immediate logical inference to Tolkien's line from Shakespeare's. In light of this I recommend removing the reference to logical conversion, but keep the existing concept of rearrangement to form a new meaning.

Someexistence (talk) 06:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Confusing Language
The line "The way appearance displays reality in our world is largely inverted in Middle-earth with respect to the subject matter of the poem." is very confusing, not sure what the intention of the line is but there must be a clearer way to saying it.

\beggs (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:52, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I would also like to add that the tag original research after discussing Aragon's linage is not appropriate as it is explicitly stated in the original works, primarily the silmarilian. 70.56.193.219 (talk) 03:02, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

In-universe analysis seems correct, but perhaps inappropriate in it's present form.
In particular, the following paragraph has a few problems.

>> The way appearance displays reality in our world is largely inverted in Middle-earth with respect to the subject matter of the poem.[clarification needed] The first line is a variant and rearrangement of the proverb "All that glitters is not gold", known primarily from Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice, resulting in a proposition bearing a completely different meaning: Aragorn is vastly more important than he looks. The second line emphasizes the importance of the Rangers, suspiciously viewed as wanderers or vagabonds by those the Rangers actually protect from evil. Lines three and four emphasize the endurance of Aragorn's royal lineage, while five and six emphasizes its renewal. They can also be seen to represent a spark of hope during a time of despair and danger. Line seven refers to the sword Narsil. Line eight foreshadows the crownless Aragorn's accession to the throne of both; the kingless Gondor and the vanished Arnor.

First, although this jives with my reading of LOTR, it still seems like original research. Because it does not follow directly and obviously from the book, citing a secondary source for this analysis is important.

Second, the first sentence is not an in universe description, but rather a deep commentary on the book as a whole. It either needs a very good citation or to be excised.

Additionally, this paragraph is in the same section of the page as the out-of-universe description of the poem. Perhaps this needs to be moved to its own section? Or perhaps the list of appearances needs to be moved to it's own section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.236.220.27 (talk) 18:29, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Bizarrely inapplicable "template messages"
The two template messages [ (1) "personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay" and (2) "original research"] plastered at the top of the page seem quite strange, inappropriate and misplaced. I realize that there is generally some ambiguity and subjectivity with such tags, but I cannot recall ever seeing any as baseless and irrelevant as these two. One or two lines might -at a stretch- possibly be read as though based on "original research," but already present in-text notes such as "citiation needed" fully cover that minor deficiency. I thus recommend immediate removal of both template messages.Drewkeeling (talk) 10:26, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I've removed template #1 for being wholly inaccurate, and moved #2 to the "Overview" section, the third paragraph of which does seem to contain an uncited analysis of the poem:


 * V2Blast (talk) 06:59, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * V2Blast (talk) 06:59, 16 November 2019 (UTC)