Talk:Literary reception of The Lord of the Rings
 | Literary reception of The Lord of the Rings has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: January 28, 2022. (Reviewed version). |
 | This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Work needed edit
The reception areas need to be redone. The reviews written there are pathetically biased and negative to one of the greatest writers of all time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoshuaTedder (talk • contribs) 20:29, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
LOL. They are just jealous that they never wrote anything as wonderful as these books are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.51.145.103 (talk) 07:41, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
The New York Times review by Judith Shulevitz shouldn't be discussed as an original review; it's from 2001. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.102.99.20 (talk) 20:16, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:44, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
