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

[MacGyverMagic/Mgm]

On 5/15/07, doc <doc.wikipedia at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> Delirium wrote:
> > Jeff Raymond wrote:
> >> I think, however, this is one of those times where we need to be
> cognizant
> >> of our audience and how we're used.  I don't think we should be
> completely
> >> ignorant of the fact that we're a quick reference tool, and that the
> >> typical way some people use Wikipedia lends itself to bizarre links and
> >> occasional missteps.
> >>
> >> Yes, it's kind of dumb to put a spoiler in [[The Christmas Carol]],
> which
> >> most English-reading audiences would know the ending of.  But is it
> >> equally as dumb for [[The Book Thief]]?
> >>
> >
> > I agree we should pay attention to that possibility, but I think a lot
> > of it could be done in a subtler way.  In articles on specific works,
> > simply collecting the spoilerish content under a heading such as Plot
> > Summary ought to provide sufficient warning that plot information will
> > be given away in that section.  Other than that, just being a bit
> > careful about gratuitously spoiling endings could remove a lot of the
> > trouble---if a work relies heavily on a twist ending, then maybe mention
> > that it relies heavily on a twist ending in the intro, but don't mention
> > what the twist *is* until the Plot Summary section.
> >
> > -Mark
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> Unless the twist is precisely what makes the work important. In which
> case it is clearly one of the most important pieces of information and
> belongs in the lead.


Of course. The film you mentioned is an example of where the ending belongs
in the lead. But I think we could safely write about Star Wars without
revealing Vader is Skywalker's father in the lead.

Mgm