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

[John Lee]

On 5/16/07, doc <doc.wikipedia at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> All this got me curious - so I took a look at:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Spoiler
>
> One problem is it is distinctively patronizing to our readers - of
> course, if you read material under the heading 'plot summary' - you will
> be told (guess what) the plot. We don't need spoilers in such cases.
>
> But among the more unexpected uses are:
>
> A Biblical book:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Ruth
>
> Romeo and Juliet (they die)
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romeo_and_Juliet
>
> Hamlet (he dies too)
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamlet
>
> My Fair Lady (she doesn't die)
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Fair_Lady
>
> Star Wars (cos someone doesn't know he's Vader's son? )
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars
>
> The Graduate
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Graduate
>
> Casablanca, Emma (FFS!), The Hunchback of Notre Damme, The Wind in the
> Willows, the Grapes of Wrath, Lord of the Flies, Dorian Gray, The Taming
> of the Shrew, Snow White (?), Sons and Lovers, Tess, and Petronius'
> Satyricon (yes, that's a work from the 1st Century AD!)
>
> And that's just with a quick skim.
>
> Now, it is one thing for buffyfans and trekies to protect their secrets.
> There's a weak case for books just published and episodes yet unscreened
> in some parts of the world. After all perhaps someone searching us here
> has just come from some fandom site where spoiler warnings are expected.
> However, when this crap juvenile starts getting into our mainstream arts
> coverage - and particularly historical works - we just look bloody
> ridiculous.


Absolutely. I think we need to start using {{spoiler}} like we use fair use
images - only where it is absolutely necessary. It is one thing to slap a
{{spoiler}} on, say, a movie which comes out only tomorrow in theatres
worldwide. It is another to slap {{spoiler}} on [[Bible]] because Jesus dies
at the end and comes back to life - which might actually happen if at the
moment we are sticking such tags on things like the [[Book of Ruth]].

We've gone way overboard with {{spoiler}} tags. We should use them only
where we're damn sure that the majority of our audience won't have seen the
work/otherwise know the plot and probably won't want to know at the moment.
Otherwise...really, why are we doing this with every little thing that could
present a surprise to someone? Are we going to have to put a {{spoiler}} on
the fact that [[George Washington]] did not chop down the cherry tree or
that [[Santa Claus]] is not real so we won't ruin the pleasant fantasies of
small children who might be reading WP?

I'll admit I've overused {{spoiler}} in the past - this was generally when I
was irritated that a book I had been planning to read was spoiled for me -
but it's time for a change in our editing habits. Being an encyclopaedia,
people shouldn't be surprised that we *gasp* summarise the whole story and
its significance.

Johnleemk