More actions
Index → Panopticon → DWBIT: Odd man out
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.
When naming issues of magazines, we seem to be fairly consistent. We take a proper acronym of the magazine's title, right?
But then we get to Doctor Who: Battles in Time and suddenly it's
Can anyone give a good reason why I shouldn't mass move all issues of DWBIT to the format, DWBIT Issue 1?
- Nup.
- I can't think of any bad reasons either. --Tangerineduel / talk 15:44, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Implemented, in concert with ideas mooted at Forum:DWM Issue 000/DWM. See Tardis:Manual of Style#Magazine issues for resulting policy.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ <span style="">01:55:31 Tue 05 Apr 2011- You know, we really shouldn't overtly prefix things. It's understandable when used to shorten citations or to explain them on the prefix pages, but to have articles titled "DWBIT 1" and such just leads to confusing article titles, whereas the above example stating it's issue 1 of Doctor Who: Battles in Time is a lot more unambiguous. It would make a lot more sense to move all the DWM's and DWA's and so on to the more unambiguous titles and leave the prefixes where they belong (as citations or pages explaining the citation).--Tim Thomason 03:51, April 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Implemented, in concert with ideas mooted at Forum:DWM Issue 000/DWM. See Tardis:Manual of Style#Magazine issues for resulting policy.