Forum:K9, K-9, K-9 (2050), K9 Mark 2, K-9 Mark II

Okay. Before K9TV gets fully under way here, we need to settle an old debate. What is the proper way to spell this character's name? There's a discussion over at Talk:K-9 available for those wishing to catch up on the discussion. The name has never been given with a hyphen on screen. Ever. Nor is it anything but "K9" in Target Books. Or in the K9 Sparrow Books (like K9 and the Beasts of Vega), written by co-creator Dave Martin. No, what happened was the DWM, the magazine that couldn't even spell Peter Davison's name correctly on the cover, got it wrong. They were the ones who introduced the hyphen. They consistently use it in Fourth Doctor comic strips. They consistently use it in non fictional articles. So it's Dez Skinn's fault that later, original works like the short story "Housewarming" also use "K-9".

But the important bit, to me, is that it's never "K-9" on screen. The voice actor is always credited as providing the "Voice of K9". The only "punctuation" — and it's not actually punctuation, but really just a little stylistic "bullet" — is what's on the casing, and therefore on the K9 and Company title card: K•9. It is clear, though, based on scripts, casting call sheets, and credits that this was never meant to be observed. Every scrap of evidence from production indicates that the character was "K9".

I propose that al K9 pages should be moved to this spelling of the name. Yes, I know there are already redirects, but the actual name at the top of the page should be "K9 Mark ". Sure K-9 should link to K9, and I don't propose some massive rooting out of every spelling of K-9 on this wiki. But the page title should absolutely go with the most correct name possible.

Then we come to the real bugbear: the K9 of K9TV. And here there is urgency to move because soon a large number of new pages will refer to him. The page currently resides at K-9 (2050). But look at that page. In the infobox, it's called "K-9 Mark I.1". The first, bolded mention in the lead calls him "2050 K-9". So when one goes to that page, one is immediately hit with three different names. Something's got to give here.

And the answer is lying at the bottom of the page, qualified by the words "there is a slight possibility that his names is K9 Mark 2". There's nothing slight about that. That is his name. We've even got the screencap to prove it. For some unknown reason we are rejecting the only on-screen proof we have in favor of two or three conjectural titles. I don't even get where "2050" comes into it, as that year hasn't been mentioned onscreen, I don't think. Besides, even if it has, that's not where he comes from. The whole point of Regeneration is that he's been pulled to Earth via a time machine. Calling him "K9 (2050)" is a bit like calling the Third Doctor "Doctor (1970s)" or "Doctor (Exiled to Earth)" or "Doctor (UNIT)". In a universe based on time travel, you simply can't get into the business of naming a character based upon where he rolls up one day.

Imagine that K9 is a successful series. It goes on for a few years. The kids get older or brattier or whatever. And they're not asked back to the fourth series. But by that point the producers have made a little cash and they decide to give the thing a bigger budget and give K9 the ability to travel in space. Or even time. Would it make sense then to call him "K9 2050"? Of course not. We have to use names that are actually given to us on screen, and ones that will be flexible enough to accommodate possible changes to the show's format.

He is K9 Mark 2. Oh, look. A red link. The name's available. Slap a "you may have been looking for K9 Mark II" at the top of the page, and Bob's your uncle.  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍  13:54, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll back away from being so strident on K9 vs. K-9.  I have recently found some credits in the BBC Wales version that use the hyphen, though there are equally other times where he's credited without the hyphen.  So, we can let that bit slide.  I'm still not terribly convinced that the series name is actually K-9 — production information and industry announcements all seem to go for K9 — but that's a simpler fix if and when it needs to be done, that can be done with one shake of a bot's tail.


 * I'm still, however, concerned with this whole K-9 (2050) business, and before we get too deep into the series' transmission, I think we should still have some kind of debate about that. First of all, it's a totally non-standard name.  We almost always disambiguate characters by referring to the production from which they come, not the year.  At the very least K-9 (K9TV) or K-9 (K-9 TV series) would more closely hew to how we traditionally disambiguate.  But I still think the best disambiguation is to follow in the tradition of how we disambiguate other K9s and give him the name we actually see on screen, K-9 Mark 2.   Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  14:43, April 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Go with the in-universe first and add brackets if there's a conflict. So K9 Mark 2 is what's actually used seen on-screen. (See File:K9 Boot Manager K9 Mark 2.png).
 * However if we're going with consistency with the other K-9s, then have the hyphen in and a note in the Behind the scenes section noting the disparity of hyphen/no hyphen for K-9 naming. --Tangerineduel 15:08, April 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Right, but which way do we actually go. I think it's clear it's not K-9 (2050), but do we go with hyphen or without?  Obviously, I'm for hyphen-less, cause that's how it's actually seen on screen (and I'm for the hyphenless form to take precedence on other models, cause that's how it's most often seen in end credits).  But we have to drop the 2050 business.  So, somehow we need to decide hyphen or hyphen-less.  Do we take a vote?  If so, is there a time frame for that vote?  How do we get a point of actual decision here?   Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  20:12, April 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmmm...
 * Well as I said back over in the other discussion Housewarming uses the hyphen (I'm relatively sure Interference also uses it), so we need to go with the in-universe sources. (Also the REF book Doctor Who: The Book of Lists also uses it with a hyphen).
 * The screenshot says the 2050 version has no hyphen, so go with that (for the 2050 one only).
 * I do acknowledge that the hyphen-less K-9 spelling is not backed up by internal documents (and if this were an OOU article I would be inclined to go with that), but it's an in-universe subject so we need to go with what the in-universe sources say. --Tangerineduel 06:41, April 21, 2010 (UTC
 * Well, you say that the in-universe source tend towards the hyphen, but that's not true. They're actually mostly hyphenless.   Here's a list of things that go without the hyphen:
 * The K9 Sparrow books, like K9 and the Time Trap
 * DWNs like ''Doctor Who and the Androids of Tara
 * The K-9 and Company (novelisation) and annual.
 * Most later novels, like The Well-Mannered War
 * The source of the hyphen is fairly clearly DWM comics and DWM articles; DW Weekly is in fact where the hyphen starts. Stylistically, Dez Skinn chose to insert the hyphen into stories and, perhaps more influentially, non-fictional articles.


 * So I think if you're talking about in-universe, you have to consider what's used most often, and that's overwhelmingly "K9".  Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  23:14, April 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well...DWNs are in the grey area in terms of canon 'useful until they contradict something in a primary source' to paraphrase the canon policy, the DWN will contradict main canon occasionally.
 * Interference is an even later novel (published 1996).
 * The later published novels / books seem to go with the hyphen.
 * As the hyphen is present in the comics doesn't this add weight to the use of a hyphen in K-9's name, does it matter that it was a stylistic choice? I know it matters, but to this conversation I mean, if other writers picked up on this and continued with it.
 * Also while not in-universe I just checked the Full Circle DVD back cover and it uses a hyphen. --Tangerineduel 15:16, April 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * The official K9 site consistently uses K9. This plus the consistent use across credits in the 1970s — and almost consistent use in the BBC Wales era — indicates to me that Bob Baker means for it to be K9.  I think the wishes of the creator — that is, the original intent – trumps everything.
 * As to your other points, I honestly don't buy that DWNs are, in the case of spelling, capable of contradiction. They are the primary source in matters of spelling so far as the original series is concerned, because the authors were working from the primary source material of the scripts.  The fact that Dez Skinn, and a few authors, later came along and changed things is irrelevant.  Perhaps if one could say that, at 1980, Dez Skinn's innovation caused a wholesale changeover to K-9, and everyone consistently used it, that'd be one thing.  But that's not what happened.  Yes, Doctor Who Magazine appears to have taken a policy stance to always use "K-9", but there's no such decision elsewhere.  There are many examples, even in original fiction, of the use of "K9" well after 1980.  And "K9" is — completely overwhelmingly — the primary way to spell the dog's name in credits/behind-the-scenes situations.


 * I think, too, that the majority of the "other media" use of K9 was around the time he was actually in the show — and all of that is "K9".  So it's not a question of whether you'll find a later novel to back up the hyphen.  It's a matter of what is the most common use.  And when you tally up the DWNs, annuals, short stories, kids books, and even those later "adult" novels, "K9" is much more common.  And that's before you even get into the matter of what Bob Baker's intent so clearly is from OOU sources.


 * As for Full Circle, well, that's the oddest one of the classic series bunch. It's the one episode where he's not credited as "K9", but he's not credited as "K-9" either.  He's "K.9".  Yeah I know you're talking about the cover, and it's true he's "K-9" on the R2, but it's still sorta interesting to remark in passing how odd the end-credits are on that one serial.  Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  16:33, May 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Alrighty, common usage as with other subjects wins out.
 * Once the pages are moved perhaps a summary of your research about this subject can go in the 'Behind the Scenes' section explaining this subject. --Tangerineduel 16:50, May 18, 2010 (UTC)