G'day CS,
<snip/>
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.
Hmm, in this thread I'm finding myself agreeing with a few people with
whom I normally would not agree. This can't be allowed to spread, surely!
I find the most disappointing plot summaries are in our /Doctor Who/
articles. Wikipedia /Doctor Who/ coverage, in general, is simply
fantastic, especially when compared to, say, /Star Wars/, or /Gundam/
(is it /Gundam/?). However, the plot summaries are just plain useless.
Don't get me wrong, they're usually quite well-written, and it's obvious
the /Doctor Who/ junkies have sunk awesome amounts of time and effort
into putting in a long, detailed summary for every single episode. But
here's the thing: if I miss an episode, and want to find out what
happened, I *can't*. It's just not do-able. Can't see the forest for
trees, in essence. I can find out that the PM said, "My Doctor is
back!", but I can't find out why, because I'm too busy reading things
like, "The PM said, 'My Doctor is back!'" As for looking at old
episodes which /Who/ fans tell me are classics and trying to work out
why, well, forget it.
We want a common ground for plot summaries between "blurb" and
"description of every action in the story". A lot of summary-writers
get caught up in retelling the story in brief, in story order. This
makes it (relatively) easy to isolate spoiler warnings, but not to give
the reader a decent overview.
Let's take, oh, say, /Citizen Kane/. What if we had fifteen long
paragraphs describing the action of the film, ending with: "And they
throw it into the fire, never realising that Rosebud is in fact the name
of the sled." Now, we can bung a spoiler warning between the main
summary and that sentence, no worries. Problem solved. Now nobody will
ever have /CK/ ruined for them by Wikipedia, at least not without fair
warning. Of course, anybody hoping for a quick summary of the film so
they can be reasonably conversant in it (enough not to look like a moron
at posh dinner parties, say) is what we in the business call, "fucked",
but at least the people editing the article enjoyed their exercise.
Compare that with a discussion of what happens, in the past tense, with
a view towards making it accessible for those who know nothing about the
film but want to know what the plot is ...
Cheers,
--
Mark Gallagher
"'Yes, sir,' said Jeeves in a low, cold voice, as if he had been bitten
in the leg by a personal friend."
- P G Wodehouse, /Carry On, Jeeves/