Talk:TARDIS (Dr. Who and the Daleks)

Question

What's wrong with the Dalek movie TARDIS ? It says that a big cleanup is needed on it. I wrote quite a lot about that page, enjoying every minute about it.– The preceding unsigned comment was added by SAINT1 (talk • contribs) .

Rename tag

The rename tag asked "Isn't it "Tardis", not "TARDIS"?" However, Tardis:TARDIS clearly states that "TARDIS" refers to the time-traveling machines, while "Tardis" is the name of this wiki. Read the policy for more details. I removed the "tardis" question from the rename tag and left the part about the dab term. Shambala108 ☎ 03:33, April 18, 2017 (UTC)

But isn't this a special case, as acknowledged by CzechOut? The Dalek Movies' Tardis isn't "a TARDIS" in the same sense as the ones we know and love — it's a completely different time machine that's called Tardis (sans ‘the’). --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 12:54, November 11, 2018 (UTC)

Tardis:TARDIS: "it's necessary to maintain a strict distinction between the in-universe objects and the name of the wiki."

And Thread:117468: "Well, that goes explicitly against T:TARDIS. The wiki is Tardis, the craft is TARDIS. The distinction is of course arbitrary, but it's necessary to have a clear rule, given the fact that the Doctor's TARDIS was capitalised "Tardis" for about the first 30 years of the print franchise, and that capitalisation remains the most common in the 21st century press. The presence of Tardis in the Dalek movies is by far the minority usage of that capitalisation. Many Doctor Who writers seem to feel that it's somewhat like the situation with radar, another lower-case acronym."

Where are you getting the idea that User:CzechOut said "Tardis" is an exception to Tardis:TARDIS?

Shambala108 ☎ 15:17, November 11, 2018 (UTC)

“The presence of ‘Tardis’ in the Dalek movies is by far the minority usage of that capitalisation.”? That was the reading I got.

I'm not arguing against T:TARDIS in general, but my feeling here (as an unabashed fan of the Dalek Movies) is that there's really three different things.

There's the TARDISes we see in the regular series; it's an acronym-turned-common-noun, which, if it weren't capitalised, would more properly be written as "tardis" than "Tardis" except when referring to the TARDIS of the Doctor (which could be "the Tardis").

There's our Wiki, the Tardis Data Core, or Tardis for short. Capitalised, no italics.

And, finally, there's Tardis (capitalised, italics), the name of the ship in the Dalek Movies. It's not “a TARDIS” in the sense implied by T:TARDIS — one of the Time Lord machines whose name is an acronym of "Time And Relative Dimensions In Space" — but rather a very different time machine, which its creator christened Tardis just as easily as he could have christened it Titanic, Apollo or Enterprise.

T:TARDIS hinges on the fact that outside of the Wiki, it's correct to refer to the Time Lord machines both as tardises and as TARDISes. So we get to pick one.

But in the case of the Dalek Movies' Tardis (which is from a completely different continuity and thus cannot be lumped together with the regular Gallifreyan devices), it is simply not correct to refer to it as ‘TARDIS’ as if it were still the acronym-common name. It's not a Time-And-Relative-Dimensions-In-Space Machine, TARDIS for short; it's a time machine, called Tardis. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 15:29, November 11, 2018 (UTC)

Be careful when attributing to others an opinion derived from one sentence taken out of context. In the thread, CzechOut specifically says it is necessary to have a distinction between the story object and the name of the wiki. The comment you posted was the end of him stating that the movies use the lesser-used "Tardis". There is no statement given by CzechOut that the movie TARDIS is exempt from Tardis:TARDIS. Sometimes rules on this wiki exist for technical reasons, and this is one of them. Shambala108 ☎ 18:57, November 11, 2018 (UTC)

Alright, so I misread. I honestly thought the meaning of that sentence was "Yes, the movies' version is called Tardis and we don't dispute that, but be careful, that's an exception". I stand corrected.

Nonetheless, my points above still remain. T:TARDIS can exist because both TARDIS and Tardis are found in official sources for the Time Lord devices. But the movie version's circumstances are so different that I really don't think it counts as "a TARDIS" at all, and when it comes to the movie version as a singular entity, to my knowledge, there are no official sources spelling it TARDIS rather than Tardis. And so it's flat-out inaccurate to call it TARDIS, whereas it is a matter of stylistic preference (where the movie has made its choice) for the series' version. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 20:21, November 11, 2018 (UTC)

By the way, I have discovered that an exception for the Cushing Tardis was proposed by User:Josiah Rowe during the creation of the Manual of Style, and the proposal was never actually rejected. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 13:15, July 27, 2019 (UTC)

It hasn't been implemented, so I'd say it was rejected. Shambala108 ☎ 13:47, July 27, 2019 (UTC)

Seems to me it could just have been overlooked. At any rate, I stand by my above argument that while we can if it is convenient choose to only call the Gallifreyan timeships "TARDISes", it is flat-out inaccurate to spell the name of Dr. Who's narratively unrelated time machine this way. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 13:49, July 27, 2019 (UTC)

Stand by it all you want, but don't forget Tardis:You are bound by current policy. Shambala108 ☎ 13:59, July 27, 2019 (UTC)

I'm not forgetting it. I'm debating the matter here instead of trying to implement anything ((not that I could implement anything as a mere user, bound by policy or not, what with the proposed change being a renaming). --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 14:04, July 27, 2019 (UTC)

Two things: just because the proposition was never resolved, does not mean that that is tantamount to it being rejected. After all, @Shambala108 has pointed out, many times, that just becuase a discussion, such as one on a talk page, has waned in discussion, does not mean that it is resolved. Pick a lane.

And I agree with @Scrooge MacDuck here, about the name being a name not an acronym. I do acknowledge that Tardis:TARDIS does cover this situation, so, it does fall under Tardis:You are bound by current policy. I do believe though, that this policy should be amended to reflect the names given in a source, considering we do it for characters like the Monk nowadays. The policy seems antiquated to me, based on old ideas of "canon". But I'll probably have to wait until the Forums are returned, if they're returned, that is.

Epsilon📯 📂

12:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)