User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-188432-20130412143615/@comment-188432-20130412160413

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-188432-20130412143615/@comment-188432-20130412160413 Well, I don't want to derail the conversation, but I do feel compelled to again defend "Tardis" as a perfectly valid in-narrative capitalisation :) But I digress.

I have a bit of a problem with prose narratives over end credits, simply because of the vexed novelisation question. If you put credits under prose, then novelisations can contradict television and come out on top. That seems logically difficult next to the general maxim that information from novelisations is valid only if it doesn't contradict. Also, it would somewhat jeopardise T:K9. To me, the point of putting credits, and indeed scripts, relatively high up is that they are a lot closer to the primary (read: original) source for a character than an ill-copyedited novel written 20 years later.

It seems to me that the person who knows how to spell the name of the character is the person who wrote the original episode, and thus the sources must be ordered to preference proximity to the televised source.