User talk:2001:56A:7DB4:5700:FD4A:A040:A6A:9890

WikiProject Middle-earth
Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia and to WikiProject Middle-earth. Thank you for your intention to improve the project's coverage of Tolkien's work.

However, the project is now quite mature, incorporating detailed and reliably-cited accounts of Tolkien's writings, scholarly analysis, and Tolkien's impact on other writers and artists and on popular culture more generally. Wikipedia is, obviously, a global encyclopedia, and as such is shared by many people. They can only rely on what it says if they can verify what it says, which means that it must be consistently cited to reliable sources such as textbooks and scholarly research articles (which are good, independent, secondary sources) and where appropriate also to Tolkien's own writings, whether fiction, essays, or letters (which are the primary sources, and as such do nothing to establish the notability of a topic). For that reason, by the way, narrative descriptions of what happens to a character in a Tolkien article are to be kept as brief as possible – no longer than is essential for the scholarly analysis to be intelligible to readers.

I appreciate that there is quite a steep learning-curve in all of this, but that is the same in all areas of life which require practical skill as well as theoretical knowledge of a subject. You have begun very boldly with a major addition to an established article, Tom Bombadil, one which happens already to have been formally reviewed as a "Good Article" and labelled as such on its talk page and at the top of the article with a green circled cross icon. Such articles are never perfect, and always remain open to improvement, but it's fair to say that changes should nearly always be small and incremental; they should of course also be comprehensively cited, written in the same style and format as the rest of the article, avoid duplicating anything that is already stated, and be free of unverifiable claims.

For multiple reasons, therefore, I'm reverting your additions now. For example, "It is not known when ..., but of course ..." is not verifiable from any documented source; such writing is called original research in Wikipedia policy, and you'll not be surprised to hear that it is strictly forbidden. Such writing may be acceptable on a fan-site, but Wikipedia is not one of those. I could go on, but I think there's probably enough here to be getting started with. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:41, 11 February 2023 (UTC)