This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
I was wondering if this article has been tampered with? Only I spotted an incongruity in the first line of the second paragraph of the section entitled "Cult and popular appreciation": The text reads "The Boeotian school of epic poetry was chiefly concerned with hey how r u?" What's that all about then? The second sentence reads "The genealogies of the gods and heroes; later writers elaborated this web."
I get the sense this should read "The Boeotian school of epic poetry was chiefly concerned with the genealogies of the gods and heroes; later writers elaborated this web."
The see also section currently contains only one entry "Telumehtar" which redirects to a page called "Telumehtar Umbardacil" about the 28th King of Gondor in Tolkien's Middle-Earth. Is that right? It doesn't seem right! 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:57, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Telumehtar was one of the Middle-earth names of the Orion constellation, and in all likelihood the king was named after it. But it was not the only name, or even the most used name—see Middle-earth cosmology#Menelvagor, which would be the right target for a "see also". Even so, while it could be relevant at Orion (constellation), I fail to see how it relates to this Orion, so I'll just remove the link. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 07:55, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Tolkien also had a myth of Telumehtar, as a great hunter and warrior; see Lost Tales. I cannot quite see how to work it into the section on Literary influences; but it is not unlikely to be of interest to readers here. That's what a See also ought to be.SeptentrionalisPMAnderson 14:47, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
It's worse than that now. The article about King Telumehtar is now deleted and the link is just a redirect to the overall topic "List of kings of Gondor". The entire "See Also" link has gone beyond any relevance and probably should be deleted. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 15:32, 27 March 2014 (UTC)