{{spoiler}} Jesus dies … False ending! He comes back! {{endspoiler}}

[reddragdiva]

• Science proves that trolls really are a bunch of dicks.

This proves snowspinner's deep evil. Superlative call, sir.

I'm slightly surprised, if pleased, at the pent-up hatred for the {{spoiler}} tag's overapplication. It actually survived a deletion nomination last year, but the arguments for its grossly unencyclopedic nature and direct incitement to violate and defend violations of neutrality this time are much more convincing. Particularly the examples of the sort of misuse its presence fosters — did you know this thing had been placed on Anagram and Kiss? I thought this was the most unthinkingly process-over-product edit (complete with txt spk) I'd seen on the wiki yesterday, then I saw this.

I expect the tag will not be killed utterly, but I do expect its application will be severely curtailed. Someone's already helpfully noted that if there's a "Plot", "Summary", "Synopsis" or similar header, then, duh, there are going to be plot elements therein. Personally, I'd favour the German Wikipedia's spoiler warning policy, which Babelfish and I loosely translate as:

When discussing creative works, e.g. books, music, computer games, TV series or films, an encyclopedia's task is to give a summary of the work and its place in the overall field. Thus, it is natural that the action of a book or a film will be described and discussed in full.

Many books or films lose their attraction, however, if too many details or the ending are revealed before they are read or seen. So it became common on the Internet to put a spoiler warning before such descriptions.

In encyclopedias, however, this is rare. In the German language Wikipedia, after long discussions, consensus developed not to include spoiler warnings, and to remove existing ones. The section which contains a description of the plot should, however, always be clearly denoted, for example by the heading ==Plot summary==.

Why deal with bad policies by nominating them for deletion? Because processes are generally held responsible for their widespread misuse. If the idea is good but the process is bad, the idea doesn't justify saving the process. (Of course, I expect IAR will quite properly continue to ignore this.) I am enormously pleased that in this case, it was done by direct attention to core policies and detailed demonstration of how it violates those.

As Doc glasgow notes: "I mean that Prince Charming marries the girl is a plot twist you'd never expect ;)"

By mindspillage. Based on Moldy nectarines by Roger McLassus. GFDL.

Comments

[feanelwa.livejournal.com]

Class. I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees that picture in their head on reading the word spoiler.

[unagothae.livejournal.com]

If it's true that some people find angry looks rewarding, it sure explains the assholes who seem to go out of their way to get them...and how much more assholish they become as I continue to smile and be polite to them. I guess I'm an antagnost after all :D

I'm looking forward to my last two shifts. Being at work and not caring what people think of me is SO FUN! Especially in retail when people seem to really want me to care. Adults throwing temper tantrums is hilarious when I don't have to worry about caring!

[steer.livejournal.com]

I'd not read the three little pigs yet you bastard! :(

[vatine]

On the whole, I approve of spoiler warnings, in their place. Specifically, in fora where "early access" to material is limited (say, a newsgroup devoted to a specific TV series; it's probably a good idea to smack spoiler warnings on postings about a show until it has had a chance to air in all localities where the show is scheduled to air, plus maybe a few more days) or fora dedicated to something else, where these things occasionally crop up.

One of the places where I feel, strongly, that they're NOT of any use is in scholarly discussion of media, because taht's the whole POINT, innit? If I am (say) an avid follower of Ziggurat 17 and care deeply about not being spoiled, I do take care to not go to the Ziggurat 17 Wikifoo article (I might peek at the Uncyclopedia article, fairly safe in the knowledge that this work of wossname that I care deeply about will be mocked mercilessly). I'd fully expect an episode guide to actually follow episodes, but I may avoid looking at the "refers to" or "reffered to in" sections (since there's some chance of future-episode spoilage there).

[miss-amethyst.livejournal.com]

Lovely! =D

[m0rbid-princess.livejournal.com]

As far as I see it, if you go looking up a book or a movie in an encyclopedia, you're going to get the plot told to you and all bets are off - only an idiot would think otherwise.

If Wikipedia is planning to develop wholesale policies against idiocy, I fear you guys are going to have your work cut out... :)

[reddragdiva]

That's why the release of the pent-up outrage is so good to see.

[reddragdiva]

Though of course that might just be my massive reserves of testosterone speaking.

[also-huey.livejournal.com]

I think the finest moment of Wikicomedy this week is this bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/James_D._Nicoll_%282nd_nomination%29), specifically the bits near the bottom with Patrick Nielsen Hayden and John Scalzi.

[reddragdiva]

I love the stupidity.

[ajohnymous.livejournal.com]

Science proves that trolls really are a bunch of dicks.

An apt metaphor, then, no doubt -- a 'dick', after all, is an injector of life and giver of pleasure. Likewise, what could be more fertile and fruitful than going about the Earth spreading the exhilarating joy of competitive interplay, teasing and challenging others to passionate action and examination.

How fortunate then to have the testosterone rich! Without, we might otherwise simply decay into a complacent, coddled, blissful bower of self-satisfied nothingness.

Science proves that trolls really are a bunch of dicks.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

10/10 for a line that's witty and informative...

[greylock.livejournal.com]

Just in case you miss it amid the standing around waiting to spawn:
http://greylock.livejournal.com/1535609.html

ARGH!!!

[godgirl.livejournal.com]

stop sucking me into reading minutae of wikipedia writing policy for hours!!!

my life is ebbing away!

i could be doing fun stuff, like sleeping, or watching CSI!!!