[WikiEN-l] NOR contradicts NPOV

[Ken Arromdee]

On Sun, 28 Dec 2008, David Gerard wrote:
> clearly original research to declare as spoiler 

I can't believe you're still saying this.

It is, of course, an example of exactly the kind of specious objections that
still had to be addressed and added to the "controversy".  A spoiler warning
is a statement about content and as such, is exempt from the original research
rules, in the same way that it's not original research to declare "this
article is subject to BLP" (without a reliable source which says that the
article is subject to Wikipiedia's BLP policy) or "this article may contain
unverified claims" (without a reliable source which says that the article
contains unverified claims).

Or to use a recent example, *your own* claim that we should have quality
warnings on Wikipedia.

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2008-October/095845.html

Pray tell, how is a spoiler warning original research and a quality warning
not?