This article was nominated for deletion on 29 April 2023. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
From Out of the Rain article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please note that "out" in the title should not be capitalised. "(From) out (of)" is a (composite) preposition and as such should be in lower case. Many sources mistakenly capitalise "out", but unless the producers of Torchwood confirm this as intended, standard capitalisation should be followed. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) for more information. Thank you. — Edokter • Talk • 00:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Edokter's right on this one: the "out" should be lowercase. Quote from WP:CAPS:
"In general, each word in titles of books, films, and other works takes an initial capital, except for articles ("a", "an", "the"), the word "to" as part of an infinitive, prepositions and coordinating conjunctions shorter than five letters (e.g., "on", "from", "and", "with", "about"), unless they begin or end a title or subtitle."
"Out" falls under this categorization, and should be lowercase. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 01:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
FYI where did you get your cast list from? That is not the official cast list. Starhunterfan ( talk) 01:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
The WP:CAPS guideline is itself contradictory since the word "about", given as an example, is not in fact shorter than five letters! 83.104.249.240 ( talk) 11:39, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
The official BBC Torchwood site lists the episode title here... http://www.bbc.co.uk/torchwood/sites/episodes/series2/ep10_preview.shtml ... as having a capital 'O' and, to be honest, I'm surprised this discussion even needs to take place. Despite whatever conventions Wikipedia has it was fairly plain from the start that the 'O' would be capitalised. Episode/Song/Book titles do not follow standard English grammar. They are titles, not sentences. I'm not a regular Wikipedia contributor but this is very obvious in other places (magazines, other websites). I don't understand why it isn't the same here. Passing Scottish Bloke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.203.45.113 ( talk) 05:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
The BBC website as linked above shows it as "From Out of the Rain", and BBC iPlayer spells it with a capital O, http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/page/item/b00950q2.shtml?src=ip_potpw.
It seems to me that, regardless of the conventions in WP:CAPS, the title is intended to be written as "From Out of the Rain" and therefore WP:IAR should be utilised. According to WP:IAR, If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it. And WP:CAPS is preventing the true, sourced title, from being used. Jacobshaven3 ( talk) 14:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, these are getting boring now, but.
There's been a myriad of sources, which people have provided, that indicate a capitalised Out. There hasn't been a single source provided that says it shouldn't. Wikipedia requires information that is sourced. I think the sourced information trumps the MOS on this one, and I don't really understand how anyone can argue to the contrary.
Also, I think Edokter's conduct here is reprehensible. You're involved in the movement dispute, and slapping a move protection on it in the form you prefer... well, apologies in advance if this looks like a breach of NPA, but that fucking stinks. If you believe you are in the right, you would be able to find uninvolved admins that support your position and petition them to lock it. Utilisation of admin powers to protect your preferred version is a flagrant breach of WP:ADMIN#Misuse of tools; I really don't want to throw this one to WP:ANI, but I really think you are out of order here. Kinitawowi ( talk) 15:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
There is a resolution which could satisfy both sides of the debate, if you want it.
Those who favor the capital cite BBC sources, and Starhunterfan has said that "capitalisation of 'Out' in this title is deliberate and is a reference to a specific thing within the episode".
Those who favor the lower-case cite Wikipedia policy, but Edoktor is prepared to use the capital "if the producers intended the capitalisation, and/or the story itself reflects that intention".
Edoktor is quite right that we should follow Wikipedia policy but is also quite sensible in offering to allowing the producers' intent to trump it.
However in this instance there need not be a conflict between the two.
You see 'out' is an adverb and as such deserves a capital letter in a title.
I'm a professional proofreader and I had exactly this issue two days ago, when capitalising Meat Loaf's album Bat Out of Hell. 'Out' here has its usual adverbial meaning, 'forth from, away from, or not in a place, position, state etc'. (I'm working in Australia; so my primary source is the Macquarie Dictionary. It regards 'out of' as a compound preposition when it means 'without', as in 'out of eggs' or 'out of work', but it regards 'out' explicitly as an adverb in 'out of order', 'made out of scraps' and 'to run out of coal'.)
'From out of the rain' has 'out' with this same adverbial meaning. It doesn't seem to be part of a compound preposition 'out of'; it certainly doesn't have the meaning 'without'.
It would therefore be consistent with Wikipedia policy to capitalise the title as "From Out of the Rain". This would seem to be enough to satisfy everyone who has contributed to the debate. Klippa ( talk) 11:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
An interesting discussion but I think we're losing sight of the question. Surely the correct capitalisation is as it appears within the broadcast programme itself. This may or may not agree with the WP guidelines but at the end of the day they are only someone's arbitrary opinion anyway. If a television programme is to be considered a piece of art then the spelling, capitalisation, even the typeface (if you want to take it to that extreme) of the title as it appears within the programme itself is the correct one, even if it seems to the purist to be grammatically incorrect. For someone to presume to be "correcting an honest mistake" is arrogance in the extreme. There can be nothing more authoritative or more reliable a source than the original work itself. Similarly, the WP entry for the series should be called "TORCHWOOD" and not "Torchwood". 83.104.249.240 ( talk) 14:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I've only seen the preview trailer for this, but Gwen did not appear in it and so I assume the episode takes place during her honeymoon. If she does not appear, this is surely noteworthy. U-Mos ( talk) 19:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, that's cleared that up then. It does seem odd she was completely left out of the preview trailer though. U-Mos ( talk) 13:52, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
The film shows him with the other members of the sinister cast. He says he was with a different outfit, but he has to say something to explain it. Should there be more of a reference? -- GwydionM ( talk) 18:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
The film shown in the Electro cinema is printed on 35mm stock - you see it clearly on the Steenbeck and when it's being loaded into the projector. However, back in the Hub the projector that Toshiko operates is obviously a 16mm model. Noticing elements (the Ghostmaker and Pearl) missing from the film, Ianto expresses doubt that it is the same film as he watched in the cinema. Jack assures him that it is but how can it be when it won't physically fit? 83.104.249.240 ( talk) 15:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
alien tech? 84.13.30.238 ( talk) 17:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
As soon as I looked at the article, I clicked "move" as the title appeared wrong, before I noticed all the to-ing and fro-ing. The article location should be "From Out of the Rain" - "Out of the Rain" is the place/concept/plane/dimension/whatever the evil traveling show people were from, hence the nonstandard capitalisation of "Out"; they didn't come out of the rain, or come out of "The Rain", they came from "Out of the Rain". Hence, "From Out of the Rain". "Out of the Rain" is the place where the things originally existed, and "from out of" isn't a preposition in this context - out is used as an adverb, and ought to be capitalised. Am I making sense? Neıl ☎ 19:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Crypes people... I was hoping to lay this to rest. Let's not start another move-war. I agree with Don that te anology is wrong, but you did manage to convinve me, somewhat, that Out of the Rain can be viewed as a adverb. Now can we please have some consensus? — Edokter • Talk • 11:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I do believe that the people seen in the lido, disappearing when the flask is opened are in fact ghosts from the already hospitalised victims instead of other unknown victims. They would have been conjured by the Ghostmaker to serve as the Night Travellers' audience. Moreover it does not appear consistent that some victims should just die and stay where they are when other disappear into fine air. Does anybody thinks the same ? 86.201.204.251 ( talk) 20:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Is it just me or is the storyline rather close to that novel? Both have creatures coming from celluloid, capturing people to watch them eternally. The destruction in both cases involved the weaknesses of celluloid. - Is there a common source to both, or did TW copy the motif of the book?-- Cyberman TM ( talk) 11:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 29 April 2023. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
From Out of the Rain article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please note that "out" in the title should not be capitalised. "(From) out (of)" is a (composite) preposition and as such should be in lower case. Many sources mistakenly capitalise "out", but unless the producers of Torchwood confirm this as intended, standard capitalisation should be followed. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) for more information. Thank you. — Edokter • Talk • 00:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Edokter's right on this one: the "out" should be lowercase. Quote from WP:CAPS:
"In general, each word in titles of books, films, and other works takes an initial capital, except for articles ("a", "an", "the"), the word "to" as part of an infinitive, prepositions and coordinating conjunctions shorter than five letters (e.g., "on", "from", "and", "with", "about"), unless they begin or end a title or subtitle."
"Out" falls under this categorization, and should be lowercase. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 01:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
FYI where did you get your cast list from? That is not the official cast list. Starhunterfan ( talk) 01:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
The WP:CAPS guideline is itself contradictory since the word "about", given as an example, is not in fact shorter than five letters! 83.104.249.240 ( talk) 11:39, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
The official BBC Torchwood site lists the episode title here... http://www.bbc.co.uk/torchwood/sites/episodes/series2/ep10_preview.shtml ... as having a capital 'O' and, to be honest, I'm surprised this discussion even needs to take place. Despite whatever conventions Wikipedia has it was fairly plain from the start that the 'O' would be capitalised. Episode/Song/Book titles do not follow standard English grammar. They are titles, not sentences. I'm not a regular Wikipedia contributor but this is very obvious in other places (magazines, other websites). I don't understand why it isn't the same here. Passing Scottish Bloke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.203.45.113 ( talk) 05:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
The BBC website as linked above shows it as "From Out of the Rain", and BBC iPlayer spells it with a capital O, http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/page/item/b00950q2.shtml?src=ip_potpw.
It seems to me that, regardless of the conventions in WP:CAPS, the title is intended to be written as "From Out of the Rain" and therefore WP:IAR should be utilised. According to WP:IAR, If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it. And WP:CAPS is preventing the true, sourced title, from being used. Jacobshaven3 ( talk) 14:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, these are getting boring now, but.
There's been a myriad of sources, which people have provided, that indicate a capitalised Out. There hasn't been a single source provided that says it shouldn't. Wikipedia requires information that is sourced. I think the sourced information trumps the MOS on this one, and I don't really understand how anyone can argue to the contrary.
Also, I think Edokter's conduct here is reprehensible. You're involved in the movement dispute, and slapping a move protection on it in the form you prefer... well, apologies in advance if this looks like a breach of NPA, but that fucking stinks. If you believe you are in the right, you would be able to find uninvolved admins that support your position and petition them to lock it. Utilisation of admin powers to protect your preferred version is a flagrant breach of WP:ADMIN#Misuse of tools; I really don't want to throw this one to WP:ANI, but I really think you are out of order here. Kinitawowi ( talk) 15:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
There is a resolution which could satisfy both sides of the debate, if you want it.
Those who favor the capital cite BBC sources, and Starhunterfan has said that "capitalisation of 'Out' in this title is deliberate and is a reference to a specific thing within the episode".
Those who favor the lower-case cite Wikipedia policy, but Edoktor is prepared to use the capital "if the producers intended the capitalisation, and/or the story itself reflects that intention".
Edoktor is quite right that we should follow Wikipedia policy but is also quite sensible in offering to allowing the producers' intent to trump it.
However in this instance there need not be a conflict between the two.
You see 'out' is an adverb and as such deserves a capital letter in a title.
I'm a professional proofreader and I had exactly this issue two days ago, when capitalising Meat Loaf's album Bat Out of Hell. 'Out' here has its usual adverbial meaning, 'forth from, away from, or not in a place, position, state etc'. (I'm working in Australia; so my primary source is the Macquarie Dictionary. It regards 'out of' as a compound preposition when it means 'without', as in 'out of eggs' or 'out of work', but it regards 'out' explicitly as an adverb in 'out of order', 'made out of scraps' and 'to run out of coal'.)
'From out of the rain' has 'out' with this same adverbial meaning. It doesn't seem to be part of a compound preposition 'out of'; it certainly doesn't have the meaning 'without'.
It would therefore be consistent with Wikipedia policy to capitalise the title as "From Out of the Rain". This would seem to be enough to satisfy everyone who has contributed to the debate. Klippa ( talk) 11:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
An interesting discussion but I think we're losing sight of the question. Surely the correct capitalisation is as it appears within the broadcast programme itself. This may or may not agree with the WP guidelines but at the end of the day they are only someone's arbitrary opinion anyway. If a television programme is to be considered a piece of art then the spelling, capitalisation, even the typeface (if you want to take it to that extreme) of the title as it appears within the programme itself is the correct one, even if it seems to the purist to be grammatically incorrect. For someone to presume to be "correcting an honest mistake" is arrogance in the extreme. There can be nothing more authoritative or more reliable a source than the original work itself. Similarly, the WP entry for the series should be called "TORCHWOOD" and not "Torchwood". 83.104.249.240 ( talk) 14:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I've only seen the preview trailer for this, but Gwen did not appear in it and so I assume the episode takes place during her honeymoon. If she does not appear, this is surely noteworthy. U-Mos ( talk) 19:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, that's cleared that up then. It does seem odd she was completely left out of the preview trailer though. U-Mos ( talk) 13:52, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
The film shows him with the other members of the sinister cast. He says he was with a different outfit, but he has to say something to explain it. Should there be more of a reference? -- GwydionM ( talk) 18:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
The film shown in the Electro cinema is printed on 35mm stock - you see it clearly on the Steenbeck and when it's being loaded into the projector. However, back in the Hub the projector that Toshiko operates is obviously a 16mm model. Noticing elements (the Ghostmaker and Pearl) missing from the film, Ianto expresses doubt that it is the same film as he watched in the cinema. Jack assures him that it is but how can it be when it won't physically fit? 83.104.249.240 ( talk) 15:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
alien tech? 84.13.30.238 ( talk) 17:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
As soon as I looked at the article, I clicked "move" as the title appeared wrong, before I noticed all the to-ing and fro-ing. The article location should be "From Out of the Rain" - "Out of the Rain" is the place/concept/plane/dimension/whatever the evil traveling show people were from, hence the nonstandard capitalisation of "Out"; they didn't come out of the rain, or come out of "The Rain", they came from "Out of the Rain". Hence, "From Out of the Rain". "Out of the Rain" is the place where the things originally existed, and "from out of" isn't a preposition in this context - out is used as an adverb, and ought to be capitalised. Am I making sense? Neıl ☎ 19:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Crypes people... I was hoping to lay this to rest. Let's not start another move-war. I agree with Don that te anology is wrong, but you did manage to convinve me, somewhat, that Out of the Rain can be viewed as a adverb. Now can we please have some consensus? — Edokter • Talk • 11:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I do believe that the people seen in the lido, disappearing when the flask is opened are in fact ghosts from the already hospitalised victims instead of other unknown victims. They would have been conjured by the Ghostmaker to serve as the Night Travellers' audience. Moreover it does not appear consistent that some victims should just die and stay where they are when other disappear into fine air. Does anybody thinks the same ? 86.201.204.251 ( talk) 20:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Is it just me or is the storyline rather close to that novel? Both have creatures coming from celluloid, capturing people to watch them eternally. The destruction in both cases involved the weaknesses of celluloid. - Is there a common source to both, or did TW copy the motif of the book?-- Cyberman TM ( talk) 11:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)