I never thought I'd found myself saying this, but
largely, I agree with
you. When you go to look something up in an encyclopedia, some degree of
spoilers should be expected.
On the other hand, if it is entirely possible to write a good article
while minimizing spoilers, than by all means, that should be done. I'd
submit [[Alundra]] as an example of an article on a video game that
doesn't explain the plot of the game in great detail, and yet still is
able to cover it in a rather decent manner. (Of course, the article has
some other issues, mainly amateurish writing, but that's not entirely
the point here.)
In a sense, avoidance of plot spoilers should be a guideline - it
usually makes for better articles - but it shouldn't be a hard-and-fast
rule, because there are occasions when spoilers are unavoidable.
Particularly when you are talking about "minor character[s] in [a]
television show" (ie, cruft).
Philip Sandifer wrote:
Although this issue has been done to death
(though I tend to think
the debate has mostly been a matter of people from outside the
relevant fandoms saying "Erm, these are totally unencyclopedic" and
then the fandoms shouting a lot and getting their way), I'd like to
note that the focus on spoiler warnings and on not revealing spoilers
in an article is, in a fundamental sense, totally contrary to the
process of writing an encyclopedia.
[...]
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
And there's the solution. Why should we have an article on some minor
character from a fictional work at all? Touch on them briefly in the
main article or a "List of characters in...".