On Sat, 19 May 2007, Ray Saintonge wrote:
The point is that just like whether something is notable, whether something is a spoiler is a conclusion made about article content.
Ahhh! Now I understand. It's original research.
So do you believe that figuring out whether something is notable is original research, unless you find a source saying "this is notable"?
Come on. Original research has nothing to do with meta decisions about article content. We don't require sources that say "this is notable" (though we do require sources from which a Wikipedia editor may deduce that something is notable). We don't require sources that say "This has enough information to be split out into a separate article". We don't require sources which say "this name is the most common name so it's the one we use to name the article", though again, we do require information (such as a Google search) that lets the editor deduce that. We don't require sources which say "this must be part of Wikiproject:Films". We don't require sources which say "this meets the criteria for being a Featured Article", or sources to say that an article goes on the main page.
Why in the *world* would you think we need sources to decide if something is a spoiler?