Forum:Some questions on referencing: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{archive|Panopticon archives}}[[category:how to]] | ||
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
I'm also wondering about what's admisable. Presumably it'd be okay for me to have a section on her pre-''Who'' appearances and her Big Finish solo adventures, but there are a handful of stories that appear in charity anthologies. | I'm also wondering about what's admisable. Presumably it'd be okay for me to have a section on her pre-''Who'' appearances and her Big Finish solo adventures, but there are a handful of stories that appear in charity anthologies. | ||
For example, the Doctor has an 'offscreen' conversation with her in [[Father Time]] that Lance Parkin wrote up as ''Iris Explains...'' for ''Missing Pieces''. | For example, the Doctor has an 'offscreen' conversation with her in [[Father Time (novel)|Father Time]] that Lance Parkin wrote up as ''Iris Explains...'' for ''Missing Pieces''. | ||
Would I get away with mentioning this sort of thing if I'm clear about the source? | Would I get away with mentioning this sort of thing if I'm clear about the source? | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
:As far as stuff in DWM, it's a debatable area, but if it has relevent information put it in the article (in an in-universe context, or at the base of the article in the 'Behind the Scenes' section). Referencing wise it would be ([[DWM]]: ''[[DWM Issue 289]]'') and if you wanted put a comma and then the name of the article. | :As far as stuff in DWM, it's a debatable area, but if it has relevent information put it in the article (in an in-universe context, or at the base of the article in the 'Behind the Scenes' section). Referencing wise it would be ([[DWM]]: ''[[DWM Issue 289]]'') and if you wanted put a comma and then the name of the article. | ||
:As far as Missing Pieces and any other charity, specially produced or stuff like that, it's less than black and white area, but as I said before put it in, we don't currently have a prefix for charity/specially produced prose, so either come up with one (and be sure to put it in the [[Tardis:List of prefixes]] list, or just leave it out and put the title as you would in brackets ie (''[[ | :As far as Missing Pieces and any other charity, specially produced or stuff like that, it's less than black and white area, but as I said before put it in, we don't currently have a prefix for charity/specially produced prose, so either come up with one (and be sure to put it in the [[Tardis:List of prefixes]] list, or just leave it out and put the title as you would in brackets ie ({{tt|<nowiki>''[[Title]]''</nowiki>}}) or alternatively you could just put Missing Pieces in the brackets if you want to be more general, though eventually the aim is to have a page for every short story and every book. So while they don't exist now it will probably some point in the future. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 16:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC) | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
On citing DWM stuff, the nomenclature of article titles for issues numbers has now changed to [[DWM 23]]. Thus, referencing is a little easier than what it was. Now, you'd just do <nowiki>([[DWM 23|DWM #23]])</nowiki> and be done with it. | On citing DWM stuff, the nomenclature of article titles for issues numbers has now changed to [[DWM 23]]. Thus, referencing is a little easier than what it was. Now, you'd just do <nowiki>([[DWM 23|DWM #23]])</nowiki> and be done with it. | ||
As far as charity publications, they're simply not valid resources for in-universe articles. For out-of-universe articles, there is now the prefix | As far as charity publications, they're simply not valid resources for in-universe articles. For out-of-universe articles, there is now the prefix . So if you wanted to list an author's work you'd be able to get away with, | ||
:Craig Hinton was also the author of | :Craig Hinton was also the author of : ''Time's Champion''. | ||
However, our tolerance for coverage of charity publications, at ''any'' level, is on the wane. It may be that we soon completely outlaw coverage. Check out: [[Forum:Charity anthology short stories]]. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} | However, our tolerance for coverage of charity publications, at ''any'' level, is on the wane. It may be that we soon completely outlaw coverage. Check out: [[Forum:Charity anthology short stories]]. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}'''23:03:00 Wed '''01 Jun 2011 </span> | ||
Latest revision as of 14:36, 19 December 2012
Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → Some questions on referencing
Hello all. I just joined and thought I'd make my first project expanding the Iris Wildthyme stub. Thought I'd just check a few things before starting.
There's a lot of useful information in DWM #289 in the article Bafflement and Devotion, which is sort of half a non-fiction piece but interspersed with fictional scenes featuring the Doctor and Iris. What would be the correct way to reference something like this?
I'm also wondering about what's admisable. Presumably it'd be okay for me to have a section on her pre-Who appearances and her Big Finish solo adventures, but there are a handful of stories that appear in charity anthologies.
For example, the Doctor has an 'offscreen' conversation with her in Father Time that Lance Parkin wrote up as Iris Explains... for Missing Pieces.
Would I get away with mentioning this sort of thing if I'm clear about the source? --Richard Jones 11:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
- As far as stuff in DWM, it's a debatable area, but if it has relevent information put it in the article (in an in-universe context, or at the base of the article in the 'Behind the Scenes' section). Referencing wise it would be (DWM: DWM Issue 289) and if you wanted put a comma and then the name of the article.
- As far as Missing Pieces and any other charity, specially produced or stuff like that, it's less than black and white area, but as I said before put it in, we don't currently have a prefix for charity/specially produced prose, so either come up with one (and be sure to put it in the Tardis:List of prefixes list, or just leave it out and put the title as you would in brackets ie (''[[Title]]'') or alternatively you could just put Missing Pieces in the brackets if you want to be more general, though eventually the aim is to have a page for every short story and every book. So while they don't exist now it will probably some point in the future. --Tangerineduel 16:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the prompt and patient reply! I'll have a little fiddle about with the entry this evening, and then write some more extensive information mid-week when I've all my books with me.--Richard Jones 19:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Archivist's notes[[edit source]]
We've moved on a bit from here, but there's some good stuff in here.
On citing DWM stuff, the nomenclature of article titles for issues numbers has now changed to DWM 23. Thus, referencing is a little easier than what it was. Now, you'd just do ([[DWM 23|DWM #23]]) and be done with it.
As far as charity publications, they're simply not valid resources for in-universe articles. For out-of-universe articles, there is now the prefix . So if you wanted to list an author's work you'd be able to get away with,
- Craig Hinton was also the author of : Time's Champion.
However, our tolerance for coverage of charity publications, at any level, is on the wane. It may be that we soon completely outlaw coverage. Check out: Forum:Charity anthology short stories.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 23:03:00 Wed 01 Jun 2011
