Forum:"Human" shouldn't be capitalised

Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → "Human" shouldn't be capitalised

This thread has been archived.

Please create a new thread on the new forums if you want to talk about this topic some more.
Please DO NOT add to this discussion.

Proposal

I call for a reversal of the language at Tardis:Manual of Style#Human on the grounds that it was not, apparently, the house style of BBC Books to capitalize the word human. In The Tomorrow Windows, EarthWorld, Halflife, The Infinity Race and I'm sure more and more, the word goes uniformly uncapitalized, even when characters are speaking. What source ever gave us license to capitalize a word that the dictionary — and BBC Books — doesn't?
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 

I don't think we've ever used a source for it because it's not really been an issue. However, the names of all the other alien species are capitalized, so it makes sense for Human to also be capitalized. If, however, we decide to change it to lowercase, the same should be done for the other species' as well. --The Thirteenth Doctor 14:26, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

Well for one, Dalek is always capitalised so that shouldn't be lower case.----Skittles the hog--Talk 15:07, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

You're both kinda missing the point. The fact that Dalek is always capitalised is irrelevant. We're not talking about that word; we're talking about human, the single most-used species name in all Doctor Who fiction. The argument "if one species does it, all others must follow" doesn't trump canonical usage. Canonical sources don't capitalise human in narrative. We're going to need a solid, canonical reason for continuing to capitalise it. (Don't worry, I'm not asking you guys to personally change things from Human to human, so don't let the obvious workload color your deliberations. Obviously the bot will do it.)
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 

Yes, I know I was straying from the point but I was trying to point out that "all follow suit" is not canonical. I agree that everything must be sourced so unless someone finds a reason you should have it changed.----Skittles the hog--Talk 11:18, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

FWIW, I support the proposal to amend the MoS. Using "Human" is so different from normal modern English usage that I notice the rule is rarely been applied across this wiki in any case; it is a bit like capitalising "Animal" or "Plant". If editors really want to avoid ambiguity and provide galactic perspective, they could use "Terran" or "Tellurian" or "Earthling", all of which derive their capital from a proper noun indicating planet of origin; or for additional precision "from/on Earth". We also have a category "humanoid" (unsourced) to consider, but in many cases it's safe to call characters simply "human", since we don't know about, say, Morestrans. In general, there's a tendency here to overcapitalise: for example, Weed Creature, which doesn't seem to deserve to be a proper noun: it's not a title, and it's not a civilization, just the two English words "weed" and "creature". 93.96.136.249 13:50, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Er...sentient species (NI humans) are nearly always capitalised in Who.----Skittles the hog--Talk 19:33, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Maybe, but the IP user is soooooo correct. Honestly, you'd think this wiki was written by Germans Who Speak English as a Second Language sometimes. As to the specifics of the weed creature, the point is that you're right, but so is the IP. Since "weed creature" is almost certainly not its species name, it shouldn't be capped. Now, you might have a leg to stand on if the novelisation went with caps like that, but my natural inclination would definitely be for no caps.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍  23:48:37 Sat 26 Feb 2011 

Yeah, that is true. We already have a number of pages titled this way (e.g. pig slave) but it seems a few (or maybe more) have been left behind.----Skittles the hog--Talk 14:09, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Examples

What does the dialogue say? As when Human is mentioned as a differentiating factor it would be by someone who isn't Human. --Tangerineduel / talk 14:34, February 26, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what you mean there TD. Humans in real life use the word human all the time. That's why it's in the dictionary. It's a perfectly ordinary English word. It's often used in Doctor Who fiction by humans, just as it's used in ordinary, real life speech. But I can give you a few examples of dialogue, sure.

• Fitz was babbling at the top of his voice. "I'm human! Really I am! Please don't take my brain apart!" (PROSE: EarthWorld)

Clear differentiation of species here.

• "And I suppose it's a form of psychology," Anji mused. "A natural human reaction not to breach obvious barriers." (PROSE: EarthWorld)
• "Well", said Calamee, "...come on - we're getting some very strange looks."

"I think this is an Earth colony," Fitz said. [snip]

"Really?" said Trix. "Because they look like us?"

"Mainly. I know it's a rather humanocentric view to assume that humanoids are all human, but ther eare too many of humanity's trappings fo it to be just coincidence." (PROSE: Halflife)

And there we have it. That's a heck of a lot of the forms of the word human neatly laid out in a single, tidy, canonical sentence.

• Eighth Doctor, in a fit of technobabble: "Well, it's broadly dependent on mass, but between humans the variation is only a matter of years, give or take." (PROSE: Emotional Chemistry)
• In the gloom, Chris saw an eye and a mouth at the grating on the stove's frong. They looked human enough, not that that was always a sure sign. (PROSE: Lungbarrow)

Not dialogue, but whether it's dialogue or not isn't absolutely determinative to the issue. Point is, this is evidence of Virgin's house style. Like BBC Books, they're going uncapitalised.

• "The human eye", Benny said, "can spot minor discrepancies quite well." (PROSE: Dragons' Wrath)
• Seventh Doctor: "This is one of those cases where having utterly superior technology isn't much use. I can't track two random human beings. UNIT, however, can follow the paper trails of tickets and credit-card receipts and hotel registrations, and the Brigadier has agreed to take care of that. (PROSE: The Algebra of Ice)
• "The Doctor's safety must take priority for the moment." Brastall sighed heavily. "I believe humans place great store in luck. Let us hope for their sakes it is justified." (PROSE: A Device of Death)
• Ninth Doctor: "Those aren't people. Not flesh and blood to be stopped with bullets or brute force. Not human like you and . . ." He reconsidered. "Like you," he decided. (PROSE: The Clockwise Man)

Now, I haven't "cherry picked" these. I've just randomly selected books from each of the major rages, searched for the word "human" and randomly picked one of the quotes that resulted. I did take the time to scan all those returned results to see if there was any instance in that particular book of human being Human, but only came up the capital H at the beginning of sentences. There was only one range for which that wasn't true, and so I dug a little deeper. I went through more than the books listed below, but these are representative results.

• An interesting case is that of PROSE: Doctor Who and the Ark in Space. Here, human is mostly uncapitalised. Easily 90% of the occurrences of the word aren't capitalised. For instance:

"You have nothing," [the Wirrn] rasped. "Our breeding is terrestrial — we require hosts for our hatchlings . . . We shall use the humans . . . "

But when the Doctor uses it as an adjective next to "species" or "race", it becomes "Human Species" or "Human Race", like this:

". . . The missing element is Man himself. What has happened to the Human Species, Harry?"

I think this is probably where we got the MOS rule from. We're just so used to reading Uncle Terrance's 6th grade English. But remember, this is juvenile fiction. It's not proper English. This is a book which also employs "Cryogenic Chamber" instead of the more appropriate "cryogenic chamber". "the Emptiness" instead of "the emptiness", "the Satellite" instead of "the satellite" and "Thirtieth Century" instead of "thirtieth century". Juvenile fiction uses capitals where it can to make something seem bigger or important — to make sure its young audience doesn't get lost. But it's not — what's the word? —encyclopedic English. We shouldn't be using novelisations as our guide to the language.

• Note, however, that other writers of novelisations don't deal with the word like Dicks did in Ark. Philip Hinchcliffe handles the word more consistently in Doctor Who and the Keys of Marinus. It's always uncapitalised, here.

The Doctor did not suffer fools gladly and his insatiable appetite for solving scientific problems always took precedence over more mundane matters. In this respect Barbara felt he was "not quite human".

and at another point, a voice says to Barbara:

"The human body is the most flexible instrument in the world."

Hope that gives a wide enough view of prose fiction to be useful.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍  00:52:06 Sun 27 Feb 2011 

Your examples answered my question (which was more is human capitalised when non-Humans are talking about Humans). Thanks for such a quick and (very) thorough response. I've no argument to the change/removal/reversal of that part of the MoS. --Tangerineduel / talk 15:22, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

I still prefer "Human" over "human", mainly for the standard of differentiating it as a species, however, if canon sources use "human" then I shall not argue with them and will support a change. --The Thirteenth Doctor 17:18, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Closing

Because this is another one of those rather minor matters of style, I'm going to go ahead and close my own discussion so as to get the community's energies moved on to more difficult matters. There being apparent opposition remaining to this notion, the MOS shall be changed to reflect that "human" shall not be capitalized except at the beginning of sentences.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 18:43:09 Sun 27 Feb 2011