Talk:Éomer

What's with the past tense?

We are talking about a work of fiction here, right? So why aren't we using the literary present? And are we really complying with WP:FICT -- trlkly 15:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Just see the WikiProject Middle-earth notice above. Súrendil 17:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• I agree we should use the literary present. Failure to do so is one of many signs of Tolkien articles not complying with our guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:37, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

The original decision at the project was to use past tense for events that transpired before the time of the books (and the project certainly can set its own guidelines); but this has largely been misunderstood, so that many editors used past tense for everything. -- Elphion (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Picture

This character appears in the film trilogy, but is lacking a picture as seen in most of the other character articles. I think I'll look for one. --Glimmer721 ^talk 22:16, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Good?--Glimmer721 ^talk 22:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

There is a picture. It's under the adaptations section where it belongs. Carl Sixsmith (talk) 06:47, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes. I added it yesterday. --Glimmer721 ^talk 18:29, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Éomer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090912054343/http://tolharndor.org/tilkal/issue1/beowulf.html to http://tolharndor.org/tilkal/issue1/beowulf.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:47, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Éomer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20130222051456/http://thainsbook.net/eomer.html to http://thainsbook.net/eomer.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:10, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Éomer/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 06:39, 4 August 2020 (UTC) Herein begins the review for Good Article nomination. GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?
   1. The Lead is a concise summary of the article as a whole and points made in the article.
   2. The Fictional Account is a very concise account of the participation of Éomer in several battles and his eventual role as King of the Mark.
   3. The Interpretations cites point of view of Tolkien scholar Tom Shippley on the character of Éomer (compulsively truculent) and how the setting and helmets indicate that Tolkien has an Anglo Saxon background / muthos for Éomer and the Rohan.
   4. The Adaptations cites etymological evidence is referencing the relevance of Old English names and influences from oral narrative. Use of the Sutton Hoo helmet in Jackson's film adaptation shows the strength of the Anglo-Saxon influence. It is a concise section.
2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
   1. Notes are succinct and appropriate.
   2. References: all The Two Towers and The Return of the King.
   3. Secondary references were examined, verified and well laid out. However one reference to Google Books brings the reader to a blank page.
3. It is Broad in its coverage.
   1. Broad, appropriate and not too detailed.
   2. There is a marked focus on the background to Éomer and the Rohan having supposed Gothic and Anglo-Saxon origins, by way of names, helmets, etc.
4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
   1. Coverage is considered neutral; there is no bias nor leaning toward one side in the characterisation of Éomer, nor the other. History is often written from the point of view of the loser. Here, there is simply a concise summary of the role of Éomer in the narrative.
5. Is it stable?
   1. For an article which commenced life in 2002, it has undergone changes, with insertion of family trees, removal of images, removal of encyclopaedic narrative, and correction of errors as to where battles occurred. I don't see edit-warring, rather, clean up of sources, in a knowledgeable and helpful fashion. Tolkien is popular and frequently taken up by young readers, account the film adaptations. We can expect that this article will largely retain its current form with oversight from knowledgeable and experienced editors.

6. It is illustrated by images and the images are appropriate and infomative (Sutton Hoo helmet).
   1. The talk page notes modification of external links, so useful, helpful stuff.
7. Overall:
   1. Pass Y