Talk:Balrog

Thanks, Zoe.

You're welcome. Please edit as necessary on any of my Middle-earth entries. -- Zoe

"Bali Raj"?

Is there any evidence of a connection between the Balrogs and Bali Raj other than the similarity of their names? I'll happily accept it if there is, but I'm really not sure that Tolkien worked this way, and the entry on Bali Raj doesn't sound at all like a Balrog to me. I think I'll remove the comment from the main article until more evidence is given; at that point, I would suggest that information like this might fit better in the "Miscellaneous" section. --Steuard 19:59, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

Are the names even that similar? IIRC "Raj" is pronounced "Raash", not "Rog" or "Rajg". [[User:Anárion|File:Anarion.png]] 21:28, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Wings Argument

I've been cleaning up this section. I don't want to unbalance it further...I already feel that there's too many references in the "against wings" camp and not enough in the "for wings" camp, based on size alone. However, the fact is most of the "for wings" section were actually "against" counterarguments. I've cleaned up a lot of it, but further "for" references would be very helpful, since I'm not an expert.--MikeJ9919 03:00, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to ask what people would think of removing the forth sentence in the first paragraph of the against wings section, "A person would have to be pretty stupid to buy this argument though." as it seems to serve no purpose other then to insult. Considering that 5th sentence accomplishes what other auxiliary value it may yield, I don't feel that helps the argument against wings in way.

I personally have no oppinion on this matter otherwise.

That sentence is pointless and detrimental to the argument and my only guess would be that it was from someone who truly believed that Balrogs had wings, as an act of vandalism or did not understand that Wikipedia is not a place for personal opinion or did not know the difference between fact and opinion. I'll remove that sentence, seeing as it doesn't add anything to the page whatsoever.

Thanks!=)

Why remove "and Gandalf"?

A recent revision of the article by Pav removed the words "and Gandalf" that came after "The Balrogs were originally Maiar, of the same order as Sauron". I'm curious to know why. It's not that I'm dead set against the change, but I felt that mentioning two different "familiar examples" of Maiar to illustrate the concept was a good thing. How do other people feel about this change?--Steuard 16:52, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

I would go for "and Gandalf" as well. Not just because it balances the example (a good guy and a bad guy, as well as giving some inkling that Maiar have different levels of power) but because it is extremely relevant. In fact, more relevant, since Gandalf is the one who ends up fighting the balrog, at which point it is extremely useful to note that they both of the same order of being. I'll give someone else a chance to comment before reinstating it, though. -Aranel ("Sarah") 17:35, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

I would agree with this as well. I think that people reading about Balrog may not neccesarily go off and read about the Maiar to find out the Gandalf is also one of them. Those two little words can yield a much deeper understanding pertaining to the Balrogs origin and relation to rest of Middle Earth and it's characters that the reader may not of had otherwise.

Wings in the Battle For Middle-Earth

I just added a few lines in the argument for their being wings, pointing out that in the game The Battle for Middle-Earth, the Balrog definitely has wings and uses them to fly for short periods. However I am not sure if this is legitimate evidence because details like this were decided by New Line Cinema, not by Tolkien. User:68.83.248.11

It's not legitimate evidence. No one disputes that the movie version had wings. The question is whether Tolkien originally intended for balrogs to have wings. —Lowellian (talk) 07:46, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

It still might be a good thing to note just to be thorough, although maybe in the paragraph introducing the reason why people are arguing about this in the first place ie "In the game and the movie balrog had wings, yet whether or not tolkien intended for the bal...". Not as an argument.

It's worth mentioning that Peter Jackson's Balrog has wings. Briefly. All derivatitve material does not need to be enumerated. That particular game is really only a minor blip on the radar of the Tolkien fan community. The argument predates the films (and will probably outlive them). -Aranel (Sarah) 14:02, 1 September 2005 (UTC)