Forum:Using Full Names

Here's a question that has been bugging me. For the names of articles, should they be based on the person's actual full name or what they were most commonly known as? Examples are Amy Pond and Jo Grant, Amelia Pond and Josephine Grant respectively. These are ones in which their commonly known names are used. However, Andy Stone was moved recently to his full name instead of Andy, as he was known. So shouldn't we come up with some sort of way of deciding? --The Thirteenth Doctor 19:17, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

If the articles are supposed to be in-universe than they should be at Josephine Grant and Amelia Pond. This has been discuseed a bit on the page for Romana. If we do use full names than her page would have to be Romanadvoratrelundar.Icecreamdif 20:49, September 11, 2010 (UTC)

I think it's better that they be what they are known by - that's what users are going to search. I mean, wikipedia has the entry "Bill Clinton" not "William Jefferson Clinton." 207.171.242.3 21:55, September 11, 2010 (UTC)#

Just because wikipedia does something doesn't mean we should do it here. The character's names are Amelia Pond, Josephine Grant (which doesn't even redirect to Jo Grant. Their commonly known names would still redirect, and it doesn't make sense to have the article's on companions nicknames. The Brigadier is called The Brigadier more often than anything else, but we still have his article at Alistair Gordon Lethbridge-Stewart.Icecreamdif 00:56, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not as though they won't be able to find them after typing in their best known names. That's why we have redirects. But if we are to be in-universe, it has to be as official as possible. The Thirteenth Doctor 22:16, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I know that there'd be redirects. But what I'm saying is that it's "Bill Clinton" in the actual wikipedia and he's certainly in-universe for it. Not saying we have to copy wikipedia, but using the name commonly known by seems a reasonable policy to me. 207.171.242.3 22:23, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Josephine Grant redirects to Jo Grant now. I think there's a lot to be said for using their best-known name as the article title and redirecting everything else in cases like this. It makes as much sense as keeping David Tennant and Sylvester McCoy where they are rather than moving them to David John MacDonald and Percival James Patrick Kent-Smith; while technically correct, it's not how we generally refer to them. I wouldn't apply this to the Brig, though, as Brigadier is not his name but a title which he has in most (but not all) of his appearances. Rob T Firefly 05:15, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

David Tennant and Sylvester McCoy are stage names, not nicknames, and since this is a Doctor Who wiki, it is primarily about there acting career. However, Amy and Peri are just nicknames. The sixth doctor and the master even call Peri Perpigillium a lot of the time, and 7 year old Amy is called Amelia. Since this is in-universe we don't just go by what the fans or the Doctor calls the character, but we should go by what the character's actual name is. And even though The Brigadier isn't his name, he is still rarely called Alistair Gordon Lethbridge-Stewart. The third doctor usually calls him just Lethbridge-Stewart when he's not using his rank.Icecreamdif 17:20, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Having checked the Naming of Articles and Naming Conventions sections in the Manual of Style for this wiki, in their present form they would seem to support using the characters' full names as the base title for the article and creating redirects for everything else. They also specify omitting titles such as "Brigadier." Unless we want to start discussing possible changes to the rules, full names and no titles looks like the way to go then. Rob T Firefly 23:07, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

I've moved Romana and Jo to their full names, but Amy's article doesn't have an option to move the page, and when I try to move Peri's it claims that there is either already a page at Perpugilliam Brown, or the name is not valid.Icecreamdif 03:42, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * What about Matt Smith (not a stage name)? Shouldn't he be Matthew? In my opinion, the name a character is known as primarily (and within reason) should be the page-name, with acceptable redirects. On Wikipedia, Bill Clinton is introduced as William Jefferson Clinton. Here, Peri Brown can be introduced as Perpugilliam Brown. The full name is a fun trivial fact, but shouldn't substitute for the page title. If Jack Harkness turns out to be James Harold or Mickey Smith becomes Michael Smith, or Rory Williams Aurora Williams, I'd hope that the original commonly-known names would be used.--Tim Thomason 07:44, September 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * The manual of style could do with clarifying somewhat, but it does start out by saying that "individual characters should be the name by which the character was most commonly known in the Doctor Who universe".
 * With regards to the full names it relates back to the naming conventions with regards to using titles as part of their names.
 * I would be inclined to agree with the Wikipedia example (and Rob T Firefly and Tim Thomason) as we do need to be strictly in-universe…to a point. We also need to look after the information and people looking for information, for this reason we still have articles that go to Ace rather than Dorothée Gale McShane, or Goth rather than Gothaparduskerialldrapolatkh. --Tangerineduel 12:50, September 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * The MOS section says: "The titles of articles about individual characters should be the name by which the character was most commonly known in the Doctor Who universe, (or "Whoniverse") with later names preferred to earlier names, and full names preferred to partial names or nicknames". Jo would be a partial name, so should be Josephine. Amy, who is actually still called Amelia by her parents, should then be called Amelia. Ace, however, is an alias used by her, so would be outside this. I suggest we rethink the MOS section to read something along the lines of:
 * "The titles of articles about individual characters should be the name by which the character was most commonly known in the Doctor Who universe. If a full name is provided, though is not generally used, the article itself should start with it. For example, the article should be listed as Amy Pond, but should start with "Amelia Pond, more commonly called Amy Pond..." Exceptions to this rule are articles in which usage of the common name would result in the need of brackets to refer to which episode the character came from. An example of this is Andy Stone whose commonly known name Andy, would result in the article being called Andy Stone (The Waters of Mars)."
 * Thoughts? --The Thirteenth Doctor 13:57, September 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Nice work.
 * I think that can be added to naming conventions or naming of articles. I don't think (at the moment) it should replace what's there, as I said the MOS does currently need some clarification to clear it up a bit.
 * If you'd like you can add it under what's there at the moment and I'll do a quick edit following your edit (as there's some stuff about rank etc that still needs to be said). Or I can add and edit it together, whichever you wish. --Tangerineduel 14:13, September 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll let you add it in. That way you can do it in one edit. --The Thirteenth Doctor 14:16, September 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Done, I've restructured the MOS slightly placing naming conventions under naming of articles and a few minor edits elsewhere. --Tangerineduel 15:22, September 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * Nicely done, it's all much clearer and more useful now. Thanks! Rob T Firefly 07:23, September 15, 2010 (UTC)