Forum:Artifacts or Artefacts of Rassilon?

Index → Panopticon → Artifacts or Artefacts of Rassilon?

Spoilers are strongly policed here.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.

We have an Artefacts of Rassilon article, and a Category:Artefacts of Rassilon. But we have Rassilon#Artifacts. We've also got other pages spelled both ways, and both spellings appear in the bodies of various other pages.

The OED gives "artifact" as the main entry, and "artefact" as a variant spelling. (This is one of the few examples where the UK and Canada agree with the US, but disagree with other Commonwealth countries.)

But, before I go changing a couple dozen pages to make this consistent (and add a link to the artifacts article from the Rassilon article, and so on): Is either spelling used in the novels, novelizations, etc.? We probably want to be consistent with what's used in-universe, even if it disagrees with the OED. --Falcotron 22:31, May 30, 2010 (UTC)

I will get back to you on this, I need to go and find my Shada script book (which I know has the phrase "It's one of the Artefacts" or "It's one of the Artifacts" when referring to the Worshipful and Ancient Law of Gallifrey. --Tangerineduel 07:17, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

Artifact wins. Checked the Shada script book and it says: "It's one of the artifacts." (page 38/2 should anyone wish to check). --Tangerineduel 06:32, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Why did they use the American spelling of the word? User:Solar Dragon/Signature 06:42, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Because it's also the UK spelling. At least according to the Oxford English Dictionary, going back at least as far as the copy I have from the 70s (which is older than Shada). Oddly, although my OED says "artefact" is obsolete in British English and chiefly Australian in modern usage, my Random House American says "artefact" is chiefly UK. I'll bet in Australia they call it a South African spelling. :) --Falcotron 12:28, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Um, we have a variety of category names with the spelling "artefact". Can we have a policy ruling on which way the word is to be spelled so those category names can be changed? Category:Gallifreyan artefacts, Category:Human artefacts and probably a couple more. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 18:50, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

On the other hand, at least one article (Rod of Rassilon) is in the non-existent Artifacts category.

Doesn't The Invasion of Time specifically refer to Gallifreyan art(i|e)facts? If so, maybe we could look for the official subtitles for that and/or the novelization. If it agrees with Shada, we're set. If not... someadmin can make a judgment call and we make them all consistent, I guess? Either way, we probably need add redirects for the other spelling. --Falcotron 21:01, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Here was I thinking this was an easy fix.

Artefact is an Australian usage, according to my 'The Australian Concise English Dictionary', it does list 'artifact' but just says 'see artefact'.

I would prefer to go with text based sources for this one and have the subtitles to back it up (after all the subtitles spell TARDIS 'Tardis'). --Tangerineduel 12:27, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

OK, I searched through as much as I could (I don't have everything) for all instances of either spelling. The only mentions of the Artifacts of Rassilon I found were the Shada script book and the fan club novelization of Shada. I could have sworn that term first appeared in The Deadly Assassin, but it's in neither the subtitles nor the novelization, nor is it in the novelization for The Invasion of Time.... But the word in general is used many times. Unfortunately, the results aren't very illuminating.

• Early Virgin books used the "i" spelling almost exclusively. There are only two exceptions before The Also People. From that point on, the two were used interchangeably, sometimes even in the same book. Official synopses (and therefore presumably press releases and the like) always used only the "i" spelling.
• BBC Books used the "e" spelling almost exclusively in the EDAs and PDAs, and most of the exceptions are on covers. I didn't find either spelling in any official synopses. None of the NSAs I have use the word at all.
• Target Books used both spellings interchangeably--never within the same book, but you can find back-to-back books that alternate, and books by the same author with both spellings.
• Subtitles use the "i" spelling, but the word is only in 2 episodes that I have, 1 being unofficial subtitles for the Shada VHS reconstruction (which also contains the typo "arifact").
• The New Zealand Doctor Who Fan Club uses the "i" spelling (for whatever that's worth).
• Overall, counting the whole corpus, "artefact" appears in more sources, but "artifact" appears more times (largely because of a few early NAs).

It looks like, contrary to what the OED or any other dictionary says, both spellings are alive and well in the UK, and both are plentiful in Doctor Who texts. (Also, I should mention that the OED and their usage guide have been accused of having a bit of a prescriptivist bent, and refer to various things as "preferred" even though actual usage is closer to 50/50.) So, now what? --Falcotron 02:52, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Well...(excellent research by the way).

On the Virgin NAs I seem to recall reading somewhere (either Bernice Summerfield: The Inside Story or on the now defunct Outpost Gallifrey forums) that the Virgin novels sometimes had an editorial lean towards American spellings of words / usage.

We can't really use how many 'artifact' appears as a ruling, because as you say in those early NAs it could be used dozens of times in a small group of novels. So what makes more sense is to go with 'artefact' which appears over a greater number of sources, which should indicate it's in greater use rather than the use of 'artifact' in a few source which could be editorial bias towards that spelling. --Tangerineduel 16:53, June 9, 2010 (UTC)