[WikiEN-l] {{Spoiler}} insanity

[MacGyverMagic/Mgm]

Both retaining all spoiler tags and removing all of them are extremes
someone is going to be unhappy with, but Three Little Pigs? You can write an
article on a fairy tale without discussing its moral which means revealing
the end.

Mgm


On 5/17/07, doc <doc.wikipedia at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> Matthew Brown wrote:
> > On 5/16/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I have asked the user to explain how their edit improves the
> >> encyclopedia. I can't wait to hear the answer.
> >
> > I as well.
> >
> > I have noticed a behaviour in which when a false 'consensus' has
> > emerged in a corner of Wikipedia's policy and guidelines, some users
> > believe that this false consensus gives them license to ignore proof
> > that that consensus self-evidently does not exist.
> >
> > This has clearly happened here: a subset of Wikipedia editors has
> > created a false consensus in a corner of Wikipedia's guidelines to the
> > effect that spoiler warnings are mandatory.  This kind of false
> > consensus can happen easily, because most Wikipedia editors neither
> > read nor edit guideline pages on a regular basis.  Only those with a
> > specific issue to push tend to pay them that much attention.  Thus, a
> > 'consensus' can emerge (all five editors actually noticing the
> > proposed change vote in favor).  If the change sticks - if nobody who
> > cares enough notices and fights it - then editors coming across the
> > wording for the first time assume that a strong consensus must exist
> > to support the wording and begin blindly following it, assuming it to
> > be the Wikipedia Way.
> >
> > This is encouraged by the heading on most guideline pages saying that
> > the content is supported by strong consensus - even though the
> > guideline pages are not protected and therefore there is no guarantee
> > of that whatsoever.
> >
> > Those who have blindly bought into that false consensus are often
> > quite jarred when they find out that there is opposition to it, as is
> > shown here.  That our spoiler guideline appears to be strongly opposed
> > by a large number of long-time editors shows that its current form and
> > practise sneaked in without being noticed.
> >
> > I strongly doubt that anything remotely resembling consensus exists
> > for the extreme interpretation of the spoilers guideline (that spoiler
> > warnings should always be used).  Thus edit-warring to keep spoiler
> > warnings in place is seriously misguided if it is being done strictly
> > in defense of the guideline in question.
> >
> > I suspect that when the dust settles we will find a position emerges
> > that has widespread support - I imagine one that neither
> > blanket-endorses nor blanket-condemns spoiler warnings.  Thus, in the
> > interim, editors should address the specific concerns of the article
> > if the addition or removal of a spoiler warning concerns them.
> >
> > -Matt
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
>
> Absolutely. This is the problem with so many of our stylistic policies -
> few people care until the small clique that develops them starts
> enforcing conformity across swathes of articles. When people who are
> actually working on the article complain - they are told it is policy -
> and directed to the policy page - if they want to change it they must go
> there. When they do, the clique quickly rejects them. The same pattern
> is happening with infobox mania and with bloated Wikiprojects where a
> small  group, often of non-writers, decides that all articles in 'their'
> field will conform to their rules.
>
> The solution is:
> 1) Low tolerance for people turning up on articles they don't want to
> contribute to, to enforce some style.
> 2) A method for the community to rubberstamp a guideline developed by a
> small group, if it effects anything more than a small section of the
> encyclopedia. At the moment all we have is the blunt weapon of MfD for
> the community to say "Hell, no" to a small section of organised editors.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>