From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Molu
On Thu, 18 May 2006 16:59:11 +0100 Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:What's the reliable source for any particular detail from any particular article being considered by reputable authorities as constituting a spoiler?
See [[WP:POINT]]. You are delibarately disrupting a reader's experience of WIkipedia by removing spoiler notices when the consensus is clearly for keeping them. This sort of thing when done with malicious intent is called vandalism.
Consensus can be an ass. If the section is headed "Plot summary", then if it *didn't* contain details about the plot, it should be called something else. Why do we need a spoiler warning in such a case? It's like picking up a packet of peanuts and seeing a warning notice: "Caution, may contain nuts."
I'm not against spoiler notices where appropriate, but surely common sense should come into where they are needed and where they are not!
Pete, wondering if King Kong gets the girl