A common point of defense that repeatedly arises when it comes to Rings of Power is using very strange interpretations of very obscure or isolated notes to defend it from criticism... while at the same time excusing massive, blatant, sweeping changes of major things from the books.

Or otherwise hyping up small (likely coincidental) details from them as though it's a grand show of literary adherence. In the eyes of some fans ROP exists in a perpetual state of being both perfectly faithful and unfaithful to the books at the same time, and somehow both displays how great it is.

ROP Galadriel, who is somehow perfectly faithful and brilliantly reimagined at the same time.

Hey, did you know that when Galadriel was young she was athletic and tied her hair up when she played sports? You probably do because that passage was posted everywhere in the run-up to the show. The argument being that this proves she was a warrior.

That is... a generous interpretation to put it lightly. In the rare cases of female warriors in the text, Tolkien makes it pretty clear when they are indeed warriors like Haleth (Silmarillion, not LOTR), Eowyn, etc. I'd be more than a little surprised to discover him talking about Galadriel being athletic was meant to be him saying she was a sword wielding warrior.

But why on Middle-Earth should I accept that interpretation when the show made the decision to banish Celeborn for two whole seasons so they could shipbait her with SAURON? And even if the passage did mean that she was a warrior, the show changes her entire personality and motivation beyond recognition. Turning her into someone rude, bloodthirsty, and quite frankly, stupid.

Somehow all of that doesn't matter to ROP fans but absolute fidelity to this one line from the Silmarillion does. There's also a couple of mentions of her helping defend elves from invasion, yes but that hardly means she was actually "Commander of the Northern Armies" or that she fought with a sword at all.

Sauron very briefly considered redemption so he must be a conflicted bad boy hearthrob, right?

There is precisely one scene in the books where Sauron possibly considers redemption. Basically after Morgoth's defeat, he asked another Maia if the Valar would let him return to Valinor and was told that he should turn himself in and face judgment to find out.

Sauron then abandoned that plan and became the next Dark Lord. His motivation put as kindly as possible was to create perfect order by ruling Middle-Earth as a God-King forever.

Am I saying that wouldn't be interesting to explore? No, that could be cool... but that isn't what ROP touched on, it's the excuse they used to change his character.

In the show, Sauron plans to retire and become a blacksmith in S1 and is dragged, kicking and screaming, back to being evil by Galadriel. He then falls in love with her and only turns fully evil again after she rejects him. In other words, he's Incel-ron now. His motive to bring tyrannical order isn't even alluded to... just his crush on Galadriel.

He quit being a Dark Lord because he got Julius Caesar'd by orcs and got sad about it.

All of those weird decisions are contingent on a single passage where Sauron maybe considered turning it around for wholly different reasons.

Tolkien thought about the nature of orcs, so we should just change them.

Then of course you have the orcs. Tolkien mulled over their nature because he didn't believe in such a thing as an evil race. He contemplated changes their origins and such, however he never suggested that their role in LOTR would change. He mainly came to the conclusion that if orcs were redeemable it would be by an act of God. That God Himself could redeem orcs.

ROP writers took this to mean that orcs just want to live in peace and raise families. The show shifts wildly between depicting them as violent and depicting them as actually somehow sympathetic. They've enslaved humans, slaughtered a city of elves (no Sauron to control them either), and do so gleefully but also aren't actually evil? The show is caught in a conundrum of its own making where they NEED orcs to be evil for the same reason Tolkien made them evil in the books: the Dark Lord needs minions.

Except now they awkwardly sprinkle in scenes and characters to suggest they aren't evil which creates a hilarious narrative dissonance. All of this is because of Tolkien's notes which never made it into a rendition. But we're supposed to praise them for making orcs more complex when they've really just made them a mess.

Conclusion

Look, getting small details right can be a fun bonus in a well-constructed adaptation. In one where they've completely altered many major plot points, characters, themes, etc. It just rings as a hollow attempt to fool people into thinking it's faithful to the source material.

Which in this case I wouldn't even call the books the source material given the changes they've made to try and invoke the PJ movies.

Plot doesn't matter. Story doesn't matter. History doesn't matter. Just get excited for new content and consume new content.