Blu Aardvark wrote:
I never thought I'd found myself saying this, but largely, I agree with you. When you go to look something up in an encyclopedia, some degree of spoilers should be expected.
On the other hand, if it is entirely possible to write a good article while minimizing spoilers, than by all means, that should be done. I'd submit [[Alundra]] as an example of an article on a video game that doesn't explain the plot of the game in great detail, and yet still is able to cover it in a rather decent manner. (Of course, the article has some other issues, mainly amateurish writing, but that's not entirely the point here.)
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).
Philip Sandifer wrote:
Although this issue has been done to death (though I tend to think the debate has mostly been a matter of people from outside the relevant fandoms saying "Erm, these are totally unencyclopedic" and then the fandoms shouting a lot and getting their way), I'd like to note that the focus on spoiler warnings and on not revealing spoilers in an article is, in a fundamental sense, totally contrary to the process of writing an encyclopedia.
[...]
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
And there's the solution. Why should we have an article on some minor character from a fictional work at all? Touch on them briefly in the main article or a "List of characters in...".