This template 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
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
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.
It's intended to provide a navigational tool for all Tolkien films. The Lord of the Rings is not the only work by Tolkien that was set to film. The Hobbit films, be they animated or the upcoming live version, do not have the Lord of the Rings navbox on them so this template will link all those. De728631 (talk) 00:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hobitit is in the section "Live action films"
However, as its article has it: Hobitit (literally The Hobbits) is a Finnish live action fantasy television miniseries, it is not a film but a series. 85.217.43.203 (talk) 20:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A mini series typically consists of individual short films, so I don't see a reason not to sort this with the cinema films. De728631 (talk) 17:27, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As does any series, if you want see it like that. But probably the most important point is that this series has never been seen in theaters. Or doesn't that matter either? 85.217.42.90 (talk) 04:17, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This still seems to confuse editors, so no, in my opinion it doesn't matter whether it is a theatric version or "only" TV. Middle-earth in film has an entire section about TV productions, so these are a valid addition to this template. @Γιάννης Ευαγγελίου and Chiswick Chap: Please feel free to chime in here. De728631 (talk) 15:29, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, moving pictures can move via antique celluloid film projected on to a white sheet, or digital projectors onto a silver screen, or computer flat screens, or antique television cathode-ray tubes, they are all movies or "films". The distinction between the technologies does seem quite irrelevant from the point of view of the artform, however fascinating it might be for historians of technology. Whether they are watched in the open air, in a sitting room, in a cinema, opera house, dance studio, drama theatre, or sitting in a car, train, ship, or plane, doesn't matter either. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:08, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Peter Jackson's place in Middle-earth in motion pictures is secure[edit]
I am genuinely puzzled both by the repeated failure to observe WP:BRD and by the extraordinary assertion that Jackson does not belong in this template. Some millions of film-goers would reply that Jackson was essentially synonymous with Middle-earth in motion pictures, given the enormous success of his six feature films, not to mention the large body of Jackson-derivative material including Jacksonesque fan films. There is no shortage of reliable sources connecting Jackson to Middle-earth film; for starters,
The template has functioned effectively for years now, very much in the same form, and it is hard to see how removing its central player could make any kind of sense really. I have restored the template to the status quo ante, where it belongs during the discussion until we have reached consensus, or begged to differ. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exclusion of film-makers in navboxes for films and film franchises is standard practice per WP:PERFNAV, and any film has a large number of contributors. No exception should be made here. The inclusion of Peter Jackson's interpretation of The Lord of the Rings is sufficient here as it relates directly to the topic, not the man himself. He is already well linked in any relevant article. --woodensuperman 15:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This template 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
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
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.
It's intended to provide a navigational tool for all Tolkien films. The Lord of the Rings is not the only work by Tolkien that was set to film. The Hobbit films, be they animated or the upcoming live version, do not have the Lord of the Rings navbox on them so this template will link all those. De728631 (talk) 00:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hobitit is in the section "Live action films"
However, as its article has it: Hobitit (literally The Hobbits) is a Finnish live action fantasy television miniseries, it is not a film but a series. 85.217.43.203 (talk) 20:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A mini series typically consists of individual short films, so I don't see a reason not to sort this with the cinema films. De728631 (talk) 17:27, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As does any series, if you want see it like that. But probably the most important point is that this series has never been seen in theaters. Or doesn't that matter either? 85.217.42.90 (talk) 04:17, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This still seems to confuse editors, so no, in my opinion it doesn't matter whether it is a theatric version or "only" TV. Middle-earth in film has an entire section about TV productions, so these are a valid addition to this template. @Γιάννης Ευαγγελίου and Chiswick Chap: Please feel free to chime in here. De728631 (talk) 15:29, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, moving pictures can move via antique celluloid film projected on to a white sheet, or digital projectors onto a silver screen, or computer flat screens, or antique television cathode-ray tubes, they are all movies or "films". The distinction between the technologies does seem quite irrelevant from the point of view of the artform, however fascinating it might be for historians of technology. Whether they are watched in the open air, in a sitting room, in a cinema, opera house, dance studio, drama theatre, or sitting in a car, train, ship, or plane, doesn't matter either. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:08, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Peter Jackson's place in Middle-earth in motion pictures is secure[edit]
I am genuinely puzzled both by the repeated failure to observe WP:BRD and by the extraordinary assertion that Jackson does not belong in this template. Some millions of film-goers would reply that Jackson was essentially synonymous with Middle-earth in motion pictures, given the enormous success of his six feature films, not to mention the large body of Jackson-derivative material including Jacksonesque fan films. There is no shortage of reliable sources connecting Jackson to Middle-earth film; for starters,
The template has functioned effectively for years now, very much in the same form, and it is hard to see how removing its central player could make any kind of sense really. I have restored the template to the status quo ante, where it belongs during the discussion until we have reached consensus, or begged to differ. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exclusion of film-makers in navboxes for films and film franchises is standard practice per WP:PERFNAV, and any film has a large number of contributors. No exception should be made here. The inclusion of Peter Jackson's interpretation of The Lord of the Rings is sufficient here as it relates directly to the topic, not the man himself. He is already well linked in any relevant article. --woodensuperman 15:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense; I've copied the full text of the guideline below. Jackson's name would appear in the template whether it is linked or not; it just seems absurd to use it for structure within the template and not to permit a blue link, especially as the guideline in no way forbids it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)WP:PERFNAV states, in full, "Avoid adding performances of entertainers into the navboxes for the productions that they appeared in, or crew members into navboxes for the productions they worked on. This includes, but is not limited to actors/actresses, comedians, television/radio presenters, writers, composers, etc. This avoids over-proliferation of navigation templates at the bottom of performers' articles, and avoids putting WP:UNDUE weight on certain performances of an entertainer over others."
(edit conflict)This guideline in no way says that Jackson, who is a director not a performer, should not be in the template. Please see the discussion thread above for a brief statement of his central importance to the genre. Having his name linked in the template actually takes up no extra space compared to just naming "Peter Jackson film series" without a link, so the guideline really doesn't apply here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:52, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note "crew members", "writers", etc... You still think this doesn't include Jackson? --woodensuperman 15:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He's very more than that, isn't he: entrepreneur, director, visionary, creator. Honestly, read the three books I cited in one of these discussions and think it over. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
