The ones who like them are, from the comments, trying to use WP as a movie guide. It isn't--its an encyclopedia. When one reads an encyclopedic entry on a work of fiction, one expects to find the plot--the whole plot. There are multiple other sources for movie reviews. If we want this section of our coverage to look respectably encyclopedic, the spoilers should stay out.
It's not a matter of pleasing people or not, but of maintaining a proper tone and proper standards.
On 12/16/07, Peter Ansell ansell.peter@gmail.com wrote:
On 16/12/2007, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
joshua.zelinsky@yale.edu wrote:
Quoting Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com:
On 16/12/2007, joshua.zelinsky@yale.edu joshua.zelinsky@yale.edu wrote:
See http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=6424&p=147306#p147306
In retrospect I'm not sure why no one did this before. The sample isn't exactly representative (since it is xkcd fora). But one interesting thing seems clear; the public prefers spoiler warnings on Wikipedia and uses them.
Well... thirty people on an internet forum prefer spoiler warnings and use them. I'm not entirely sure we can generalise from that to "the public" with any degree of confidence.
That's true. The sample size is very small. But considering that one argument made in favor of spoiler removal was that the spoiler-removal was favored by the public this preliminary data doesn't seem to back that up at all and if anything shows the other direction.
If you check recent changes, it's also apparent that a large number of people are in favor of vandalism. That doesn't mean we should start allowing it.
How did you make the connection between spoiler warnings and vandalism? Seems like you are just putting up a straw man to knock down.
Peter
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l