Talk:Men in Middle-earth/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Artem.G (talk · contribs) 05:55, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I'll be reviewing this article. It looks like a good read, please expect my comments and questions in the next few days. Artem.G (talk) 05:55, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for taking this on. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:11, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Comment/questions

 * Although all Men in Tolkien's legendarium are related to one another, there are many different groups with different cultures. - wouldn't it make them different nations?
 * That's the general drift, though not all the "groups" can really be called "nations", e.g. the Beornings are just a small (quasi-tribal) group, the word "nation" isn't used anywhere of them and it seems far too strong for the context.


 * The main human adversaries in The Lord of the Rings are the Haradrim and the Easterlings. - why is 'Easterlings' bolded? It gives an impression that they are more important or significant than any other races/cultures described here.
 * It's marked as a redirect, but I agree it looks odd, removed.


 * Drúedain[T 9] Wild men, Púkel-men, Woses - where can these alternative names be found?
 * Ref added.


 * About Sindarin and Quenya in Gondor. In the Quenya article there is this passage, that I think can be added as a note, the same about Sindarin:
 * From the Second Age on, Quenya was used ceremonially by the Men of Númenór and their descendants in Gondor and Arnor for the official names of kings and queens; this practice was resumed by Aragorn when he took the crown as Elessar Telcontar. Quenya in the Third Age had almost the same status as the Latin language had in medieval Europe, and was called Elven-latin by Tolkien.
 * In Gondor at the end of the Third Age, Sindarin was still spoken daily by a few noble Men in the city Minas Tirith. Aragorn, raised in Imladris, spoke it fluently.[citation needed]
 * I'm not convinced it's relevant here: this is about Men, and those two languages are just an aspect of one nation's culture, well covered in the linked articles. Probably best we don't go there really.
 * Sure, it was just a thought.


 * it was noted that Hobbits "not included on that list, were a branch of the lineage of Men." - maybe they should also be in the table?
 * Well theoretically, but it seems more of a phylogenetic aside than anything else. In practice the Hobbits are treated as quite distinct from Men throughout.


 * They and Númenor are destroyed. 'They' here are the Men of Numenor?
 * Yes, said "Men".


 * and with his apparent intention to create a mythology for England - not sure, but maybe England in Middle-earth can be linked here?
 * Done.


 * clothes the Haradrim in long red robes and turbans, and has them riding their elephants, giving them the look in Ibata's opinion of "North African or Middle Eastern tribesmen".[3][1] - refs can be rearranged
 * Done.


 *  revealing only their "coal-black eyes" through their helmet's eye-slits[3] Ibata comments that - period missing before the ref?
 * Added.


 * The Tolkien scholar Deborah C. Rogers compares the  - can it be the same Deborah Rogers?
 * Interesting, but there's no evidence it's the same person.


 * engaged to be married to Arwen, an Elf-woman - maybe even Elf-princess?
 * Perhaps that's a bridge too far; she's actually not described as such though it's evident she's close to that rank.


 * I think that a short section on languages can be useful to understand how different groups are connected and influenced by one another, though it's only a suggestion.
 * Gosh. Language was such an important topic to Tolkien that he spent much of his life on the subject, so we can't say it isn't significant. Still, we have major articles on his languages, especially the Elvish ones, and the topic is both quite different from that of the races of Middle-earth, and really only loosely connected to it. I suppose the key point would be that the "higher" men, those of Gondor, speak the "higher" Elvish languages: but that's a question of "blood", i.e. Elves are above Men, which is bordering on off-topic for this particular article, though the discussion of Faramir's taxonomy does touch on it. Perhaps you can see why I think it's probably best not to go there, but I'm open to discussion.
 * Sure. Topic on Tolkien's languages is too broad, and I agree with your reasoning.


 * About David Ibata's article on racism, IMO it's more about politics and not about the book, the Man of Middle-earth or Tolkien. As the United States wages war against an ominous "other" -- currently Al Qaeda terrorists, soon perhaps Iraqis and eventually, North Koreans? -- it's worth keeping in mind Tolkien's stern admonition against viewing his work as allegory. and Or, in the United States, the wholesale arrests and prosecutions of people of Islamic and Middle Eastern origin in the post-9/11 environment? It's more politics than literature critisism; though I'm not opposed to including it here - I understand why it's included, I just think that this article should have less weight than it currently has.
 * Well, we're only citing the part of Ibata's article that is about Tolkien, and the coverage of his views is comparable to that of several of the other scholars cited. Race is certainly a key issue ("Tolkien and race" gets a high readership, too) and it needs to be covered respectably; the section is not longer than the other two in "Analysis", so I feel pretty comfortable about balance and weight here.

In total, the article is well-written, broad but focused, has no edit wars (and so is stable), images have suitable captions, and as far as I check there is no copyright violation. Artem.G (talk) 18:23, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:48, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I thinks the article is good, so I'm happy to make it a GA! Congrats, and thanks for your work! Artem.G (talk) 19:59, 5 July 2021 (UTC)