Forum:Bold and italics for episode titles

I know this may have been discussed before, but can I just suggestion two things. The page name at the top of the page, whether it be for episodes, characters, audio drama etc should be in plain bold. I believes this looks better than the bold and italics that some pages have at the moment. My second suggestion is the name of the episode in the infobox should not be in italics, it just looks really bad - I did change the template, but it got revert for a good reason. I just believe the page name at the top of the page and in the infobox should just be bold and not bold and italics. Is this reasonable or is there a reason why is has to be bold and italics? Mini-mitch 14:54, January 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Italics is used because that's what anybody will use for a work of media. Just like I would write Shakespeare's Hamlet or MythBusters, so I would write Doctor Who or Time Crash. -- Bold  Clone  16:12, January 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course changes to the Manual of Style can be proposed at any time, but as it stands, I refer you to Tardis:Manual of Style, and the few sections under that. The recent changes to the TV infoboxes are merely the implementation of that rule.  I'm not opposed to debate to change that rule — indeed I have long argued (see Forum:Italics or Quotation marks?) that our policy on such matters doesn't always conform to standard English rules of punctuation.  However, in the case of serials, I think it's absolutely correct to italicise their names in the infobox, and to embolden and italicise them at the start of the lead.   Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  16:39, January 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * Consistency is good, so italics in the infobox makes a logical sense, the story titles are italicised everywhere else. Bolding the article title in the first instance is fairly common throughout the wikisphere, and italicising it if it's a story title makes sense also.
 * I think the title being italicised in the infobox just looks strange because it's not something we've done before, but following the logic through it does make an internal sort of sense. --Tangerineduel / talk 14:10, January 4, 2011 (UTC)