Tardis:Tardis Manual
The Manual of Style will be undergoing a radical transformation for at least the next week. The substance won't change too much — the same rules will still apply — but we're breaking it up into smaller, easier-to-digest chunks. Thanks for your patience while we complete this task.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ <span style="">02:51: Wed 22 Aug 2012
A manual of style is a document created by a publishing entity to ensure that all of its writers are working to a common standard. They are particularly necessary when working in the English language, as there are many different types of written English used throughout the world. A manual of style typically strives to settle matters of debate amongst writers by, in many cases, arbitrarily deciding questions like
- When shall we italicise words?
- How shall we name articles?
- Shall we generally use British, American, Canadian, or Australian English?
Note that a manual of style can answer any question like this in a way that might contradict one's own sense of "proper" English usage. Therefore, you should not assume, even if you are an extremely advanced English writer, than you understand the rules that we have chosen to use. Please make sure that you read this document thoroughly if you intend to edit with us. Also, be aware that the rules laid down here do occasionally come up for community review at the Panopticon, a forum dedicated to discussing the way the wiki is run. Indeed, this manual is certainly a living document. It has been locked only to prevent vandalism — not to discourage change. Please post your suggestions for how to improve it at the Panopticon, so that a wide range of users can discuss your proposal.
Except where a more detailed policy page exists, the manual of style should be considered the final word on any matter it addresses. If you don't agree with what it says, please don't blatantly disregard it. Instead, please start a discussion in the forum to change it.
For information on the most basic writing techniques and styles, which are used here, see Wikipedia's Manual of Style.
Man
| Tardis manual | ||
|---|---|---|
Naming conventions
| ||
Things with the same name
| ||
Community
| ||
Layout guide
In-universe
All in-universe articles should be structured as follows:
- Main body of article
- See also
- Behind the scenes
- External links
- Category
For more details as to what each section of an article should contain, see the Layout guide.
Out-of-Universe articles about real people
Write an encyclopaedic biography of the person, centred mainly on his or her contributions to Doctor Who, but also include other notable work if known. Do not place items of trivia, such as date of birth, under their own headings or sub-headings, especially if such headings only contain the single word, "unknown." This makes the article hard to read and is actually somewhat annoying. Please also see "Articles on living people", below, for important information regarding content.
Perspective
In-universe
If something is in-universe, or is described as such, it belongs to the Doctor Who universe exclusively and not in the real world. Characters are for example in-universe, but the actors who play them are not in-universe. Exceptions are persons, places, and organisations which appear or are referred to in the Doctor Who universe which also exist(ed) in the real world, i.e., William Shakespeare, The Beatles, the United Kingdom. Pseudohistory is an integral part of in-universe treatment of canon material. Information given from a "real world" perspective (i.e. notes about the creation of a character, or actors, or other real-world trivia) should appear under a Behind the scenes subheading.
In case an entry might detail a subject of importance both to the real world and to the Doctor Who universe, you may create a Real world section in the article, such as the one on Glasgow. The second section could have such articles as cast and crew born in Glasgow and location shooting for various stories shot there. Another example is years, months and specific days which are divided into 'Doctor Who Universe' events and 'Real world' events, see 1963 for an example.
Out-of-universe
Out-of-Universe refers to the perspective in which an article is written; it is the opposite of in-universe. Something written from an out-of-universe (OOU) perspective is written from a real life point of view. It will refer, for example, to real life publications, actors, authors, events, and so on, acknowledging that its subject is fictional. In contrast, an in-universe perspective will strive for verisimilitude; that is, it will be written as though the author existed within the Doctor Who universe. Articles about any in-universe things, such as characters, vehicles, terminology, or species, should always be written from an in universe perspective. If a section in the article is not, such as the listing of a character's published appearances or behind the scenes details, it should be tagged as such. In contrast, articles about books, movies, games, or other real life Doctor Who material should obviously be written from an out-of-universe perspective, but should still be noted as such. Basically, in-universe articles should never refer to Doctor Who by name, or any other real life things such as publications, actors, or the like.
Full sentences
Complete sentences — that is, sentences containing at least a subject and a verb — are required. A full sentence is not something that starts with a capital letter and ends with a period or full stop. The following are examples of incomplete sentences that have been found, at one time or another, on the wiki:
| Correct | Incorrect |
|---|---|
| An Unearthly Child was first broadcast on 23 November 1963. | An Unearthly Child first broadcast. |
| David Tennant's future father-in-law, Peter Davison, co-starred alongside Tennant in DW: Time Crash. | David Tennant's future father-in-law, Peter Davison. |
| The 34th issue of Doctor Who Adventures was current in the fortnight beginning 19 July 2007. ["34th issue of Doctor Who Adventures" is bolded in this case as it's the lead to DWA 34.] |
The 34th issue of the BBC's fortnightly Doctor Who Adventures. |
Exceptions to this rule are few.
- If you are directly quoting, and the original quotation is a sentence fragment, and you indicate that you are quoting, you may reproduce it.
- If you are making a simple list of words or titles, a complete sentence is not necessary on each line, because the list is likely to be a part of a preceding full sentence. For instance, if you said,
- William Hartnell appeared in the following serials:
- and then proceeded to give a list of those serials, the list is effectively a dependent clause of prepositional phrase "in the following serials". You therefore don't need a full sentence on each line of the list.
Tenses
With the exception of story article pages, articles tagged with the current event tag and ongoing concerns (such as real world articles about cast and crew) the past tense is preferred in the main article text (this includes on all Timeline pages). All in-universe articles should be in past tense.
The reasons for this are twofold. Firstly, the articles on the TARDIS wiki are presented as historical recordings that have been pieced together from scraps of information left over from the early Universe, and various eras of history. As such, all details pertaining to this history have not yet been uncovered, and more information may be added at a later date. Keeping articles written in past tense provides consistency and flavour. Secondly, the Doctor may travel into the past, the present, or the future, but from his personal perspective, any events which have been previously recorded are now in his own personal past, regardless of where in the universal timeline they may fall. Writing in-universe articles in past tense relates the timeline of the Doctor Who universe with both our and his own perspective.
- Example: Martha Jones was an inhabitant of Earth. Rather than Martha Jones is an inhabitant of Earth.
Avoid phrases like "His ultimate fate is unknown" or "what happened to the ship after that is a mystery" unless it is an actual plot point in a story. Any information that is not known is simply the extent of knowledge, it does not need to be stated.
Do not jump back and forth between tenses; this is confusing.
Do not include theories, speculation or hypothesis in any articles. You can do so in The Howling a forum specifically for the community to do this.
- See also Citation - Articles on living people
Image use
- You may be interested in seeing this information presented in an easy-to-read chart.
Use of images is encouraged on articles. As has been made clear by the community, articles with images are preferred to those without.
Markup
Please use the following base nomenclature when putting images into articles:
[[file:ImageName.extension]] as in [[file:Tensa.jpg]]
Do not use [[image:Tensa.jpg]] — even though it will work. Using "file:" instead of "image:" makes it much easier to maintain the site, and it reduces server load, as "image:" simply redirects to "file:"
Disallowed images
Images that should not be used in any articles include; amateur 'spoiler photos' and images that have been highly image-edited or had an overlay of text or colour placed over them. Colourised images from episodes originally filmed in black-and-white are specifically disallowed.
DWU articles
For in-universe articles, images must come from an in-universe source, such as a screenshot of a televised episode, or a scan of a comic strip. Novel or audio covers may also be potential sources for in-universe imagery, but only when no other source has an image to offer.
Promotional images — such as when actors pose in costume for a picture — are specifically disallowed. A good rule of thumb is that if the character is looking directly into the camera, the picture cannot be used on in-universe articles. Such pictures may be used on real world articles about the actor pictured, but out-of-costume pictures are preferred on such pages.
This ruling specifically means that most wallpapers available from the BBC's official website are not allowed on in-universe pages here. In fact, the best use for promotional images on this site is in maintenance images, such as are found on stub templates and the site's background images.
Out-of-universe and story articles
For story articles, promotional images also should not be used. Instead screenshots that capture iconic scenes from the story should be used.
Real world articles may use practically any other relevant images that have been properly sourced and tagged with the appropriate copyright tag.
Real world articles and Behind the scenes sections
The Quote template and quotes may be used within Real world articles or behind the scenes sections (including on occasion as headers), as quotes from the real world often are sourced from a wide variety of sources, that are often handled better by the template.
For example see the quote template used within this Doctor Who (2009)#Setting for the Tenth Doctor article.
Citation
In-universe articles
Telling readers where a statement can be verified is important. It helps to focus articles and keeps the details in an article to only that which actually appeared in the various Doctor Who narratives. Don't assume that your readers have the same level of knowledge about the Whoniverse as you do. Cite often, cite accurately. Format your citations according to these guidelines:
- When citing an episode, novel, book, audio drama, webcast, comic or any other story use brackets, the proper prefix for the series and then the name of the episode, in italics and linked, e.g:
- When citing an in-universe website, use the WEB prefix, the name of the website in italics and the website address shown using a piped link, e.g:
- ([[WEB]]: ''[[Torchwood website|torchwood.org.uk]]''), which appears as: (WEB: torchwood.org.uk)
- If you encounter a statement that obviously needs a citation, but you don't have the time or knowledge to correct it, type {{fact}}, which produces: [source needed]
- On this wiki, it is difficult to avoid using "weasel words" like "many", "often" and "sometimes". The nature of an internally inconsistent universe like Doctor Who's usually makes concise, absolute statements untrue. For instance, there are many occasions when the Doctor appears have a binary vascular system, but there are a few where he does not. Weasel words can be made more accurate by remembering to balance them with an appropriate number of citations. In general, if a sentence implies that something occurred multiple times, then there should multiple citations given. For instance, if you write, "The Doctor often thwarted the plans of the Master", then you should give several story names to give a sense that "often" is an accurate term. Some other words which trigger the need for multiple citations are "frequently", "various", and "regularly" — as well as the simple use of numerals ("the Doctor was known to have gone there three times").
- Should you come across a sentence that seems to need more citations, but you don't have the time or the knowledge to correct it, type {{facts}}, which produces: [additional sources needed]
Behind the scenes
"Behind the scenes" or "real world" subsections within in-universe articles should be cited using the same method as out of universe articles. See below for more information.
What a citation indicates to our readers
The above sections tell you when, where and how to insert a citation, but it's important to understand what a citation means. A citation says to our readers, "If you go back to the story cited, you will find that the work substantively includes the statement just prior to the citation.
For instance, let's look at the following statement:
Dr Henderson once puzzled over the Doctor's TARDIS key. (DW: Spearhead from Space)
By putting (DW: Spearhead from Space) at the end of that sentence, what we're saying is that, within the body of the serial known as Spearhead from Space, you will find a scene where a guy named "Dr Henderson" puzzles over a TARDIS key. Since that actually happens in Spearhead, this sentence is allowed to remain in our database.
The problem is that sometimes we kind of remember scenes being in one serial, but in fact they're in another. Or sometimes we use fan sites comprised of badly-researched statements incorrectly ascribed to a particular story. Worse, some fan sites give a citation for a particular story, but fail to make obvious that this assertion is based on speculation involving another story. (This, incidentally, is why we don't think fan sites are valid sources.)
It's absolutely vital that you check every statement you make against the story you're citing. Some good questions to ask yourself include:
- Am I going off my own research into the story?
- If asked — and given a few minutes, cause me memory's goin' — could I definitely point to a page, episode or time code when the event I'm citing happened within the story?
- Could I insert a direct quotation from the story into my sentence?
If the answer to any of these questions is "no", you're probably not on terribly solid ground.
Remember: the goal of our project is to write an original reference work. If you're copying someone else's work, rather than going back to the original narrative, you're not really creating anything new. You're just participating in a game of Chinese whispers.
If information is discovered which includes false citations, it is subject to immediate deletion.
Out of universe articles
Telling readers a statement that can be verified is important. For out of universe articles (those about the Real World or Behind the scenes) we use the same system as Wikipedia; Footnotes. The sources must have reference tags around the <ref> source</ref> (see also Wikipedia:Citing sources for more info). Or The Dark Dimension and Gothic stories for examples of correct citation within articles. A section at the base of the article entitled 'Footnotes' must also be placed with {{reflist}} (this will collect the cited sources at the base of the article).
- Please use 'Footnotes' rather than 'References' as this term is associated with the in-universe References section.
If while editing you come across a cited piece of information which has no source you can place the {{fact}} tag beside it which will display the Fact tag like this; [source needed], which states a source needs to be cited.
Rumours
Rumours may be added to articles concerning yet to be broadcast stories/series', these should only be placed within the 'Rumours' section of the article. Users must ensure the rumours are cited with a source so that they may be verified by other readers and editors.
Unsourced rumours should be removed.
Articles on living people
Although all articles should be as accurate as possible, special care must be taken with regards to articles on people that are currently alive, as issues such as libel may arise if claims are made without sources being given, or unnecessary rumours sparked. If you choose to include information of a potentially controversial nature, a source must be given, and preferably a "reliable source" such as an interview, newspaper or magazine article, etc. Wikipedia and the Internet Movie Database, not being peer reviewed, are not considered reliable sources. Nor are online (and, occasionally, print) sources that site Wikipedia and IMDb as their main sources.
Although this Wikia site is not considered part of Wikipedia, it is nonetheless helpful to review the Wikipedia Biographies of Living Persons policy. If you see an unsourced claim or comment regarding a living person, if a source cannot be located, it is best to play it safe and remove that material from the article.
Bot enforcement
Because of the size of this wiki, global maintenance can only be done through the use of a bot. Enforcement of any of the provisions of this document are subject to automatic enforcement by bot, without prior notice. It is therefore possible that you might occasionally get it into an edit conflict with a bot. Please don't take it personally; the bot has no ability to sense you're editing an article.
It is important to note, however, that you should not rely upon the bot to clean up your mistakes. It is always better to try to do things according to the MOS. Remember two key rules:
- Bots are stupid. They absolutely cannot predict the precise way in which you will have violated this manual of style.
- Bots can't be everywhere at once. It might be months until the next time that the spelling bot hits the page you've just edited. So spell things correctly now, or else your mistake might persist for an unexpectedly long time.
From time to time, a bot shall execute a script whose sole function is to clean up the code. It shall run on every page in the main namespace, as well as several other namespaces. This script will in no way change the way that a page appears. But it will perform a number of menial tasks on pages, such as:
- the removal of extraneous spaces, per T:SPACING
- the insertion of leading and trailing spaces in section headers, per T:HEAD
- the placement of exactly one space following a full stop, which isn't required, but is allowed by T:SPACING
- the placement of exactly one space between a symbol which creates a list (i.e., * and #) and the following text
- consistent capitalisation of namespaces, such that — for instance — file: becomes File:
- the elimination of some redundant pipe tricks — [[Human|human]] would become simply [[human]], for instance
