[WikiEN-l] {{spoiler}} vs. writing a goddamn encyclopedia

[Bryan Derksen]

Blu Aardvark wrote:
> 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).

On the other hand, one of the uses I put Wikipedia to on a regular basis
 depends on spoilers being present. I hate horror movies and never watch
them. But darnit, they often make the commercials for those movies so
_interesting._ So when I get hit with a horror movie promo that makes me
wonder what the heck the big secret of the movie is, I check out the
Wikipedia article and expect to find a nice straightforward plot summary
that explains all the main points.

PS, Valen is not actually a minor character despite his lack of
on-screen presence. He's basically the Minbari's Christ figure.

PPS, can we have some sort of Godwin's Law equivalent about the use of
the suffix "cruft" in deletion debates? It's basically equivalent to "I
personally think this is not worth having in Wikipedia", a sentiment
that deserves to be made more explicitly and in more detail than that.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20070514/98f66364/attachment.pgp