Talk:Kings of Arthedain
|
|
Most of these names are just names, and they are never ever going to have additional content associated with them, so there's no point in making free links for them. Stan 19:00, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- You may have a point. On the other hand, check Kings of Gondor: all kings were eventually given a (small) article. I based this page mainly on that page, and plan to add a standard click-through for these kings myself if someone doesn't beat me to it. — Jor 19:03, Jan 5, 2004 (UTC)
- Tolkien had a paragraph or two for the Gondorian kings, so there's something to work with in those cases. There's not really much point in separate articles unless other places have links into a specific ruler - if the only links are from predecessor and successor, you can reduce some maintenance overhead by agglomerating multiple people into an article where their info can all sit next to each other. (We now have so many Middle-earth articles that it's becoming a whole job just to keep them all straight and consistent - Encyclopedia of Arda eat your heart out! :-) ) Stan 20:22, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Point taken. Yet it would be a deviation from what is already established practice: you can follow the southern line all the way from Elros through the Kings of Númenor on to the Kings of Gondor to Eärnur, but as it is now the northern line is unfinished. I'll refrain from adding any more articles without real content, but do feel even a small article is better than nothing, to preserve the lines. — Jor 00:41, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
- It's kind of boring for the reader to click through one near-empty article after another, makes WP look unfinished. Just think of this article as a way to fast forward through the content-less names... :-) Stan 01:18, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)