![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Wikipedia talk:Warn readers about spoilers/Archive 1
Supporters of this rule include
Opponents include
I think that the current text is effective—it says "Warning" after all—but I know it's not the best. Anyone want to make up a better one?
I suggest changing the text to "Warning: Plot details follow". Since the spoiler warning is typically used directly within the text of the article and not at the top, it makes sense to use a text that is more specific. Furthermore, I am mildly concerned about the text "Wikipedia contains spoilers." Wikipedia should avoid referencing itself in articles, so that it is easy to re-use its material elsewhere. -- Eloquence 05:12 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Is "spoilers" a term that is generally used and understood in English, or only on the Internet? -- Eloquence 05:51 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
I can't quite believe we decided the photograph of a clitoris was perfectly ok, but that people should be protected from the ending of Ernie Goes to the Beach. CGS 06:26 24 Jun 2003 (UTC).
I don't like the new spoiler warning, and I'm changing it to a new, non-self-referential form. It's not true that all plot details are spoilers; it is apparent in describing a movie you've seen where the spoilers are. Reviewers know that and typically work around them, though if it's a movie they hate emphatically, they may deliberately spoil it for the readers. A second point I emphatically dislike, which I guess follows from the first, is when the spoiler warning appears in articles before any plot description. If people are that averse to reading about a movie's plot, they shouldn't read about movies at all. And, again, if I had known some Wikipedians would take the "policy" to such extremes, I wouldn't have lobbied for it to begin with. Koyaanis Qatsi 22:33 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
What was wrong with "Warning: Wikipedia contains spoilers"? If the self ref needs to be removed then just say "Spoilers follow" or "Warning: spoilers follow." -- mav
I changed back (unfortunately before checking this discussion) to the "Wikipedia contains spoilers" text, as that's what's on Wikipedia:Boilerplate text. If there is a consensus to change to a new warning format, please update both simultaneously so things are consistent. -- Delirium 09:07, Aug 30, 2003 (UTC)
Added No Way Out as (to my mind) the supreme example of a movie with a plot twist. Unfortunately I don't remember the movie as a whole well enough to write the article for it :p
I've gone ahead and changed the boilerplate in this article and Wikipedia:Boilerplate text (see reasoning above in a few different threads). I haven't changed any actual articles yet, in case there are objections from people who haven't gotten on Wikipedia recently.
I'm thinking of archiving the whole discussion in a few weeks or so (to allow new discussion topics without a lot of clutter) if there aren't any major objections (to the new boilerplate or the archiving). – Olathe December 1, 2003
(moved from Wikipedia:Village pump)
Earlier I removed the synopsis of the Harry Potter series from Harry Potter to Harry Potter (plot) in order to remove the spoilers from the main article.
I just added links from that page to the individual books, and noticed that there is not only a lot of duplication between the various Potter pages, but that there seems to be far too much detail. For example Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets has over 6 screens of plot "synopsis". And this is one of the shorter books!
What is the policy on this? And is that policy enforceable on what are obviously big fan pages? -- HappyDog 02:22, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Whatever happened to the nice, bold Warning: Spoilers follow? The non-bold version doesn't look like a warning, it just looks like part of the text, which is sort of annoying. Also, why the change from spoilers to "plot details?" -- Alex S 06:42, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
from village pump
General comment here, is it really necessary for article writers to detail every event in the entire plot? (See my edits to Dune.) I think it not only makes the article too long and unwieldy, it also opens the door to more errors, inconsistencies, etc. A synopsis is just that—a brief summary to lay out the essential theme, plot, idea of the book, so that a reader has some notion what it's about. Not what happens at every turn. Wiki articles shouldn't be book reports. OK, off my soapbox now. User:Alcarillo
Who is messing about with the spoiler warning all the time? I'm faced with different texts all the time. Is this some hopeless attempt to find one text suitable for all occasions? That certainly doesn't exist. The current disguise ("Skip the next passage, buddy" or whatever) is not good I think.
I would so much like to use my own spoiler warning, but each time I write one some user I don't know comes along and changes it again. |l'KF'l| 01:05, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)
"The standard way to warn readers of potential spoilers is to write {{spoiler}} before the revealing text."
With the above policy and contents links, readers may read spoilers without seeing the warning. -- Jeandré, 2004-08-24t18:58z
And the article page is contradicting itself. First it says you should place the spoiler warning just after the definition paragraph. And then it tells you that it should be placed before the spoiling paragraph. Which one should we keep? xDCDx 12:49, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
There's debate about the wording of the spoiler message, and indeed over whether we should be advising all editors to include them, at Template talk:Spoiler. Gdr 22:57, 2004 Aug 29 (UTC)
Whay does this mean??: "However, ideally the article should also contain much that cannot be seen from only reading the book or seeing the film in question." Is that about the supertext, as in other works or sources? lysdexia 00:55, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Is there a way in which we could (give the option to) hide the sample text show in search for pages that have a spoiler warning?-- Sketchee 04:44, Dec 26, 2004 (UTC)
Some of the spoilers in Wikipedia aren't the plot of a story, film or anything, but the solution to a puzzle. So the message "Plot or ending details follow" isn't exactly appropriate. But it is equally appropriate to have a warning, so people don't get carried away reading and deprive themselves of the challenge of the puzzle. We ought to have a template for these as well. It could look like this:
If nobody objects or gets there first, I'll create this template and adjust the page accordingly. -- Smjg 11:09, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Since the notice for a spoiler warning is for storylines about the articles; when they say "ruin their enjoyment"; does that mean it can ruin the surprise of watching the movie, playing the game, etc.? -- SuperDude 01:58, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
User:Zora has asked me to remove my plot details for the film Main Hoon Na. (S?)he thinks that for recent movies, that's too much information.
Do you want to add your opinions? -- Error 22:22, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
I always left that spoiler warnings were appropriate only in the obdy of an article, where a reader might not expect certain details. If I summarize the plot of a play or opera, and clearly label this summary as Plot, must I also include that template "Warning: Plot follows"? I think the template is only useful for unexpected reveals. -- DrG 02:51, 2005 Jun 8 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Wikipedia talk:Warn readers about spoilers/Archive 1
Supporters of this rule include
Opponents include
I think that the current text is effective—it says "Warning" after all—but I know it's not the best. Anyone want to make up a better one?
I suggest changing the text to "Warning: Plot details follow". Since the spoiler warning is typically used directly within the text of the article and not at the top, it makes sense to use a text that is more specific. Furthermore, I am mildly concerned about the text "Wikipedia contains spoilers." Wikipedia should avoid referencing itself in articles, so that it is easy to re-use its material elsewhere. -- Eloquence 05:12 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Is "spoilers" a term that is generally used and understood in English, or only on the Internet? -- Eloquence 05:51 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
I can't quite believe we decided the photograph of a clitoris was perfectly ok, but that people should be protected from the ending of Ernie Goes to the Beach. CGS 06:26 24 Jun 2003 (UTC).
I don't like the new spoiler warning, and I'm changing it to a new, non-self-referential form. It's not true that all plot details are spoilers; it is apparent in describing a movie you've seen where the spoilers are. Reviewers know that and typically work around them, though if it's a movie they hate emphatically, they may deliberately spoil it for the readers. A second point I emphatically dislike, which I guess follows from the first, is when the spoiler warning appears in articles before any plot description. If people are that averse to reading about a movie's plot, they shouldn't read about movies at all. And, again, if I had known some Wikipedians would take the "policy" to such extremes, I wouldn't have lobbied for it to begin with. Koyaanis Qatsi 22:33 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
What was wrong with "Warning: Wikipedia contains spoilers"? If the self ref needs to be removed then just say "Spoilers follow" or "Warning: spoilers follow." -- mav
I changed back (unfortunately before checking this discussion) to the "Wikipedia contains spoilers" text, as that's what's on Wikipedia:Boilerplate text. If there is a consensus to change to a new warning format, please update both simultaneously so things are consistent. -- Delirium 09:07, Aug 30, 2003 (UTC)
Added No Way Out as (to my mind) the supreme example of a movie with a plot twist. Unfortunately I don't remember the movie as a whole well enough to write the article for it :p
I've gone ahead and changed the boilerplate in this article and Wikipedia:Boilerplate text (see reasoning above in a few different threads). I haven't changed any actual articles yet, in case there are objections from people who haven't gotten on Wikipedia recently.
I'm thinking of archiving the whole discussion in a few weeks or so (to allow new discussion topics without a lot of clutter) if there aren't any major objections (to the new boilerplate or the archiving). – Olathe December 1, 2003
(moved from Wikipedia:Village pump)
Earlier I removed the synopsis of the Harry Potter series from Harry Potter to Harry Potter (plot) in order to remove the spoilers from the main article.
I just added links from that page to the individual books, and noticed that there is not only a lot of duplication between the various Potter pages, but that there seems to be far too much detail. For example Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets has over 6 screens of plot "synopsis". And this is one of the shorter books!
What is the policy on this? And is that policy enforceable on what are obviously big fan pages? -- HappyDog 02:22, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Whatever happened to the nice, bold Warning: Spoilers follow? The non-bold version doesn't look like a warning, it just looks like part of the text, which is sort of annoying. Also, why the change from spoilers to "plot details?" -- Alex S 06:42, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
from village pump
General comment here, is it really necessary for article writers to detail every event in the entire plot? (See my edits to Dune.) I think it not only makes the article too long and unwieldy, it also opens the door to more errors, inconsistencies, etc. A synopsis is just that—a brief summary to lay out the essential theme, plot, idea of the book, so that a reader has some notion what it's about. Not what happens at every turn. Wiki articles shouldn't be book reports. OK, off my soapbox now. User:Alcarillo
Who is messing about with the spoiler warning all the time? I'm faced with different texts all the time. Is this some hopeless attempt to find one text suitable for all occasions? That certainly doesn't exist. The current disguise ("Skip the next passage, buddy" or whatever) is not good I think.
I would so much like to use my own spoiler warning, but each time I write one some user I don't know comes along and changes it again. |l'KF'l| 01:05, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)
"The standard way to warn readers of potential spoilers is to write {{spoiler}} before the revealing text."
With the above policy and contents links, readers may read spoilers without seeing the warning. -- Jeandré, 2004-08-24t18:58z
And the article page is contradicting itself. First it says you should place the spoiler warning just after the definition paragraph. And then it tells you that it should be placed before the spoiling paragraph. Which one should we keep? xDCDx 12:49, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
There's debate about the wording of the spoiler message, and indeed over whether we should be advising all editors to include them, at Template talk:Spoiler. Gdr 22:57, 2004 Aug 29 (UTC)
Whay does this mean??: "However, ideally the article should also contain much that cannot be seen from only reading the book or seeing the film in question." Is that about the supertext, as in other works or sources? lysdexia 00:55, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Is there a way in which we could (give the option to) hide the sample text show in search for pages that have a spoiler warning?-- Sketchee 04:44, Dec 26, 2004 (UTC)
Some of the spoilers in Wikipedia aren't the plot of a story, film or anything, but the solution to a puzzle. So the message "Plot or ending details follow" isn't exactly appropriate. But it is equally appropriate to have a warning, so people don't get carried away reading and deprive themselves of the challenge of the puzzle. We ought to have a template for these as well. It could look like this:
If nobody objects or gets there first, I'll create this template and adjust the page accordingly. -- Smjg 11:09, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Since the notice for a spoiler warning is for storylines about the articles; when they say "ruin their enjoyment"; does that mean it can ruin the surprise of watching the movie, playing the game, etc.? -- SuperDude 01:58, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
User:Zora has asked me to remove my plot details for the film Main Hoon Na. (S?)he thinks that for recent movies, that's too much information.
Do you want to add your opinions? -- Error 22:22, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
I always left that spoiler warnings were appropriate only in the obdy of an article, where a reader might not expect certain details. If I summarize the plot of a play or opera, and clearly label this summary as Plot, must I also include that template "Warning: Plot follows"? I think the template is only useful for unexpected reveals. -- DrG 02:51, 2005 Jun 8 (UTC)