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

[Cheney Shill]

Spoiler:  I agree.

--- Philip Sandifer <snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:

...
> There are other cases like this - [[The Crying Game]] is
> a travesty  
> of an article because the single most interesting aspect
> of the movie  
> isn't actually revealed until the sixth paragraph. And

...

> Bold proposal: Nuke the spoiler template. Nuke all
> "spoiler"  
> policies. People may well get burnt on one or two
> articles they read  
> before they will come to a simple and obvious realization
> -  
> encyclopedia articles on a topic reveal information about
> that topic.  
> If you have a desire to not know things about a topic,
> you probably  
> shouldn't go look it up in an encyclopedia.
> 
> This should be obvious. Our mission is to provide
> information, not  
> hide it.

Exactly.  I get the feeling that spoiler rules
well-intended on things like IMDB get assumed and applied
on WP.  The only way to avoid that is to simply rip out any
suggestion that WP cares about "spoiler"s.

More importantly, there seems to be a more general problem
with articles going into all sorts of detail before ever
summarizing the most significant points of the article. 
Anything that contributes further to this really should be
removed or relegated to one of those non-templated,
non-policy, non-guideline writings.

~~Pro-Lick
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User:Halliburton_Shill 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pro-Lick 
http://www.wikiality.com/User:Pro-Lick (Wikia supported site since 2006)


--spam may follow--


       
____________________________________________________________________________________Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. 
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/