Forum:The royal 'We': Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(Created page with "{{Forumheader|Panopticon}} <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> I'm proposing we abolish the use of the "we" in in...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
But it could just as easily be written as "It is not known what became...", making it more neutral and less suggesting a viewer/audience. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 14:14, June 16, 2011 (UTC) | But it could just as easily be written as "It is not known what became...", making it more neutral and less suggesting a viewer/audience. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 14:14, June 16, 2011 (UTC) | ||
:Well, technically, it would be, "It ''was'' not known . . .", but the point still stands. Personal pronouns of any kind shouldn't be used in in-universe articles except in direct quotes. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''18:22:24 Fri '''17 Jun 2011 </span> | |||
Revision as of 18:22, 17 June 2011
Index → Panopticon → The royal 'We'
Spoilers are strongly policed here.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.
I'm proposing we abolish the use of the "we" in in-universe articles, it's often used in an indent to note something such as "We do not know what became of the Thals after the destruction of the humanoid Daleks."
But it could just as easily be written as "It is not known what became...", making it more neutral and less suggesting a viewer/audience. --Tangerineduel / talk 14:14, June 16, 2011 (UTC)
