[WikiEN-l] Reflections on the end of the spoiler wars

[geni]

On 16/11/2007, Philip Sandifer <snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm glad you asked. Among the arguments *in all sincerity* advanced by
> advocates of spoiler warnings:
>
> 1) Returning spoiler warnings to all plot sections, because it is non-
> obvious that plot sections contain spoilers

It is apparently non-obvious that they should. Perhaps if you put the
things back people would be more likely to write a complete plot
summery.

> 2) Recoding Wikipedia to have spoiler tags that can be hidden or shown
> via user preference (as opposed to via an ugly monobook setting,
> presumably)

Are you seriously suggesting I should use monobook on wikipedia. Bad
enough the source pretty much forces you to use it.

> 3) Polling about spoiler warnings in the site notice.

I've seen worse uses of site notice.

> 4) Returning to the use of handmade spoiler tags because the TfD
> result is obviously a consensus to do it that way, and anyway then
> people can't find them via "what links here"

Seems reasonable. TFD results are on a version of the template not the
idea. Same as AFD is a vote on the existing versions(s) of the
article. IF you are relying on the software working in a certain way
to fight policy battles I would suggest your methods are fundamentally
against the principles of consensus.

> 5) Including spoiler warnings whenever a reviewer can be found who
> uses a spoiler warning because then it's sourced information and it
> can't be removed

Eh? Just a specific version of a generic tactic.

> When I describe the utter repetitive frustration of dealing with this
> for six months, I am not exaggerating. Policy formation should not be
> that tortuous.

Since it will impact several thousand editors and several million
readers it should be rather more tortuous. Would keep policy bloat
down a bit.

-- 
geni