On 20/05/07, Ken Arromdee <arromdee(a)rahul.net> wrote:
Well, one person already complained about it on that
discussion page.
Fairly obviously, I'm asking about complaints that are from
third-party readers, not participants in the current discussion, and
that came up *before* I directly asked if such complaints existed ...
But
of course, this sort of complaint isn't one for which people would contact
Wikipedia. Honestly, if you read a spoiler and didn't like it, do you
seriously think as a new user your first order of business would be to
contact Wikipedia and complain?
Not in any sane world. However, in this one, they complain volubly and
at length about *every other* possible aspect of our content. So the
silence on this one is in fact a curious absence, and leads me to
think that spoilers are something that sounds useful but isn't
actually something the readers are expecting.
I did go looking for complaints. Just a quick search on
blogsearch.google.com for "Wikipedia spoiler". I got the following at
a glance, which show readers expecting Wikipedia *will* contain
spoilers, per the general content disclaimer:
http://whedonesque.com/comments/13132
http://www.watching4400.com/summer-glau-signs-on-for-the-sarah-connor-chron…
http://neoaddict.wordpress.com/2007/05/03/jericho-spoilers/
http://www.krunk4ever.com/blog/?p=1079 (where he spoils ''300'' for
himself by reading [[Leonidas]])
http://www.sescoops.com/wwe/Another_WWE_Judgment_Day_Spoiler_Revealed_IC_Ti…
http://dicombobulationnotes.blogspot.com/2007/03/oh-humanity.html
(expects spoilers, doesn't sound entirely pleased by this)
http://pandagon.net/2007/03/11/if-youre-having-fun-youre-doing-it-wrong/#co…
(uses Wikipedia as source for a spoiler)
http://thirdcat.net/?p=168] ("Spoiler warnings are the scourge of
modern civilisation")
http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=188248
http://darklightcrusader.vox.com/library/post/heroes-2nd-final-episode-summ…
http://library-bound.blogspot.com/2007/04/prestigious-prestidigitation.html
That's one even verging on annoyed that we contain too much information ...
What samples do others here see?
- d.