Talk:Blue Noon

Untitled
WHY?

Some one posted the ENDING on this page! Good thing I deleted it before anyone saw it, hopefully!

Wikipedia doesn't do spoiler warnings.

Ending
It's a Wikipedia article and according to the rules spoiler warnings are redundant as - presumably - when one comes to a page on something that is plot-driven (eg. a book or movie) they will know that there are going to be spoilers on the page.

Also the section with the Ending is not only clearly labelled, but one has to scroll down before they reach it so I think it's reasonable that the plot stays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by David-Ryan (talk • contribs) 07:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

ETA: To be honest I believe that the formatting of the articles in this series leaves much to be desired, however I also believe that removing the ending for the sake of removing the ending is unnecessary and immature. As I stated, the ending is clearly signposted before a reader can reach it and with articles on Wikipedia about fictional texts it is presumed that there will be spoilers (hence no spoiler warnings are necessary). —Preceding unsigned comment added by David-Ryan (talk • contribs) 15:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Bradj47 says this person is being stupid. Spoiling the ending of a book is immature. You might as well copy the whole book into wikipedia. Think of the author. How many books will he sell if people keep coming to Wikipedia to get the ending? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BradJ47 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

There is a difference between providing a plot summary - which can include details of a novel's conclusion - and copying the whole book onto Wiki. Wikipedia's rules allow comprehensive summaries of works including TV shows, movies and books. In fact, I'd imagine that comprehensive summaries including details such as plot endings would be encouraged so that the articles can be as complete as possible. The goal of Wiki is to provide as much free information as possible - not to delete it.

While spoiling the ending of a book is indeed immature, it is only spoiling the book if someone finds out spoilers without wanting to. This article (while pretty low-quality anyway) is clearly labelled and thus someone would have to basically not be reading the article for this to occur.

Also, in answer to your question, I don't imagine the author would sell significantly fewer books because someone posted a plot summary on the internet. I mean, there are numerous texts which have summaries on Wiki and the rest of the internet and I don't see a massive drop in book sales as a result. I also imagine if you were truly concerned about Scott Westerfeld's sales that you would have not lent the books to your friend but rather encouraged him to buy them.

David-Ryan (talk) 05:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The Ending On Blue Noon Needs To Stay Removed!!!
Nevermind. Your right. Wikipedia is a reference. It just pisses me off that my friend looked at the ending before reading the book.