* * Revised Fall of Gondolin pt.5 -- >end [the remaining sections] * *

[Maédhros]

Originally posted by Aiwendil
As I said before, I think that based on principle 7, it's a matter of deciding whether there is enough implicit evidence from later texts that they were rejected.

You bring a very interesting point Aiwendil. There is a lot of things in the Lost Tales that although not mentioned later, were by no means necessarily rejected by JRRT.
From the Book of Lost Tales I: Foreworld

But these old manuscripts are by no means of interest only for the study of origins. Much is to be found there that my father never (so far as one can tell) expressly rejected, and it is to be remembered that 'The Silmarillion', from the 1926 'Sketch' onwards, was written as an abridgement or epitome, giving the substance of much longer works (whether existing in fact, or not) in a smaller compass.

I wonder if we go and use the "Oarni/Earni", does that gives us the liberty to use other parts of the Tales which have not been expressly rejected by JRRT but only discontinued.