Throughout the wiki, we are normally very diligent with citations, which includes code references for aspects that need them. When a character/place's name is rarely mentioned, we often include that as a citation as well. However, for characters who are only internally named, we most of the time just put a note that says they are internally called that.
This is not bad, but the issue is, if you are a reader who doesn't know about the code viewer and doesn't play on PC, you just have to take the wiki's word for it that the character is called that in the files. You can't verify it by playing, after all. We already have code citations for some internal name AKAs in the infobox; following that for the main name would improve the user experience imo. It should also be done for internal name AKAs that do not currently have citations.
I think that there could both be a note and then a reference to the code. For people wanting a quick explanation to the name without needing to go offsite, the note is right there, and for people wanting proof, the citation is also there. And for aka's, I don't see a reason why not to.
It may also be worth adding multiple citations across different Chapters, just as a reference in terms of which Chapters use those specific filenames.
@KockaAdmiralac Can this be added? In summary, it is a suggestion to add one code citation whenever a character is named after an internal name, right after the note.
The code viewer does not include sprite or object names of all sprites or objects in the game. If you want to verify the note, the most reliable way is to open UndertaleModTool and search for it. I think it's rather suboptimal to cite the code when you're not trying to reference any particular behavior, but just want to show that the object name indeed matches the subject's name.
Looking at other pages, some actually do do what I said in this...
For example Charles on the UT wiki has a citation after the note in lead. So what do we do? Do we remove all of those? I think they should be added, but there should be consistency.
I think this is a reasonable idea when the only citation requires going into the code. For file names, we should just list the name of its files, with extension included.