Talk:List of works based on Arthurian legends

Extremely Inventive?

"[Bradshaw's Down the Long wind trilogy] is an extremely inventive reinterpretation of the legend." It is really, really good (it was me who originally wrote the article about Bradshaw), but "extremely inventive" fails to be objective. What the trilogy does is it take the Arthurian legend and tries to strip it back to its Celtic roots, by removing anachronisms. I'm not sure how the entry should be re-worded, but the current wording is definitely unacceptable. --Peter Knutsen 09:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Missing Author?

I would like to suggest the addition of Courtway Jones version. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/480047.In_the_Shadow_of_the_Oak_King, There is something about the way these novels spoke to me when I read them years ago. I just thought it worth mentioning that Courtway (although not still in print) needed to be on this list. Natodd (talk) 19:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Comparisons

I know that the article is intended as an exhaustive list of Arthurian adaptations, but it gives no indications of which are the successful or influential ones: for starters, a good list would probably be Malory, Idylls of the King, Twain's satire, and White's ONCE AND FUTURE KING. CharlesTheBold 04:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if we can give a list of the most successful and influential ones. Who's to judge? And some are more influential in other languages than in English. Geoffrey of Monmouth's Latin Historia introduced Arthur to the outside world, while in French the Tristan poems of Beroul and Thomas of Britain were the earliest versions of what became an incredibly popular story, and the Lancelot-Grail Cycle served as the basis for all later cyclical versions (and some that are independant). Even in English, some works, like Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, were not terribly influential at the time they were written, but have come to be regarded as classics. Others, like The Fairie Queene, were very successful and influential, but not particularly influential on later Arthurian works.--Cúchullain ^t/c 06:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

British TV series

Some years ago, PBS's Once Upon a Classic series aired a British TV series regarding King Arthur. I don't know if it's on this page in some other context or not. John Carter 22:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Last KoTR knight Arthur?

"Final Fantasy VII the final and greatest summon materia is "Knights of the Round" which has 12 knights striking an enemy with the last knight obviously being King Arthur through his extended entrance and grander appearance."

I read that this was Mordred once on the Final Fantasy Compendium forums. Can we be sure it's really Arthur? 66.63.86.156 18:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Arthur-and-the-Square-Knights.jpg

Image:Arthur-and-the-Square-Knights.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Comics

• The webcomic xkcd has a present-day Merlin's perspective on the film Memento in Merlin on Memento

I was at a loss of how to include this. It is essentially a One-shot_(comics) which includes the character of Merlin. As it has been edited out, twice :-), as "not an adaptation", I figured the answer was it truly didn't belong here. After refreshing my memory that the traveling backwards in time concept was from the The_Once_and_Future_King#Other_references_to_The_Once_and_Future_King, I realized it probably belongs there :-).--Lent (talk) 20:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Episodes of TV series

Edward321 reverted two edits after my suggestion that an edit of mine he reverted was just as important to the list as two others. He took that to mean those should be removed too. My opinion is that an individual episode or group of episodes is a "work" and should find a place in this list. I later found information similar to mine, so mine was duplication of information already here. Once Upon a Time is being counted as a work, even though only a few episodes of the series are "based on Arthurian legends". At this point we don't know how many episodes, but in the fifth season, pretty much the entire second and third episodes and a lot of the first have been about Camelot. And the fourth episode will certainly be the same, and who knows how many more.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Too lengthy Modern literature section

The Modern literature section is far too long for a section with a more in-depth bibliography link. There are far too many works of questionable enduring notability. In my opinion, only the most notable works need be listed in this abbreviate form of the bibliography. — ★Parsa ☞ talk 16:42, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Merge?

As has been suggested, it seems that this page has much in common with List of media based on Arthurian legends. It seems prudent to combine these pages unless there is any unforetold significant difference. MaddieKM (talk) 01:38, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Criteria for inclusion?

Perhaps a set of criteria for inclusion should be specified for this list, and clearly spelled out in the list's lede paragraph or in an Edit Notice. I would recommend:

This is a list of notable works of literature. Inclusion should be limited to works where the work itself or the work's creator (author, director, composer, etc.) is already the subject of a Wikipedia article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

In the absence of dissent, I have moved forward with this plan and removed entries that do not meet the criteria I spelled out. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:05, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Film and TV

Similarly as I said on the Robin Hood Talkpage the film and TV section is/was a mess, like on the Robin Hood page on Film as TV was originally so the aim here in the film and TV section is to make similar clean up to clear up some confusions on what is what when it comes to these films and TV shows, whats live-action and whats animation? theatrical films vs tv films? foreign films vs English Language films? which films are faithful adaptions of the original legend, which films are based on derative work on the oriignal legend such as Prince Valiant etc, and what are modern retellings and and parodies. DoctorHver (talk) 19:39, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@DoctorHver: I'm glad you've opened this dialog. As I've mentioned at your user talk page, these large-scale reshuffling of these lists can be disruptive, and should be discussed first. The fact that you prefer a certain organization does not mean that everyone prefers that organization. And further, it is not an uncommon practice to link to article headings (you've done it here yourself in your link to the Robin Hood talk page). When you reshuffle the organization, those links may no longer work, so the reshuffling should offer very clear advantages in the page organization.

Personally, I think your organization may well be cleaner then the prior version, but I'm not a big fan of the Arthurian material, and have no expertise in this subject matter. I hope other editors who visit this page frequently will chime in with their thoughts on your work. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:26, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunetly many list of works (film or TV) based on public domin material are very confusing that doesn't only include Arthurian legend, to say the lest so reading through them its often impossible to know how many theatircal films were produced, how many Direct-to-video films how many TV series and TV films etc, when compared to the articles about Star Trek, Star Wars, DC or Marvel films and TV series you instantly know how many films or TV series there are. So even if the original material is in public domin I would like to belive that it would make sense if articles that deals with adaptions of public domain materal could tell you how many adaptions are faitful to the original source material vs those that are not such as parodies, alternative settings/characters that just use the plot element. The real surprise here is how many films are indeed based on derivative work of the arthurian legend, such as Connecticut Yankee, Prince Valiant, Tristan Legend, Wagner's Parsifal, and now since 2004, there is an argument whether Arthur was possibly a Roman king/knight vs Medival knight/king if he existed at all so mixing the medival Arthur with the Roman Arthur's doesn't compute. No matter which version of Arthur's may be correct if he actually existed. Although my feeling is this debate might maybe he existed maybe he didn't and maybe someone wanted to make play on the legend by exploring what he might have been if he was roman instead of medival king. With that said I feel it usually works best to sepperate theatrical (& DTV) films from TV productions since two are completely diffrent mediums as they have diffrent production budgets theatrical usually higher. So I ended up cleaning out some TV films I found and moved them to the TV section. I also think its fair to seperate foreign langue films from English langue films since Arthurian Legends were originally an english literature so I would like to think readers of the English wikipedia would be more intrested in knowing how many english language films there are without having them mixed in with soem foregin language films, they might find unintresting DoctorHver (talk) 21:54, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Medieval Literature

Please link to Medieval noteworthy authors in the Matter of Britain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rootsmusic (talk • contribs) 17:09, 17 April 2021 (UTC)