Talk:The Carpet Makers

Blatant spoiler of a very powerful, haunting novel.
This article is about the most obvious spoiler of a novel I have found on Wikipedia; and it is a very powerful, haunting novel that could be very easily spoiled by inappropriate disclosures; so I am glad I read this only after I have read the novel itself. I have read the article before, but it didn't at that time contain the spoiling information I am referring to - just a brief indication of the nature of the story.

The issue of how to handle spoilers has been much debated on Wikipedia behind the scenes, and the trend seems to be that spoilers can be freely included and should not be labelled or marked in any way. The justification for this seems to be that if you go to an article about a work of fiction, you should expect the plot to be discussed, including the resolution, so it's your own fault.

I disagree with this view. There might be much discussion possible of a novel that does not include spoiling information, and people - especially those not entirely familiar with the Wikipedia conventions that have evolved on the matter of spoilers - may come here seeking information that does not include spoilers. They may be wanting just a general indication of what the book is about, but without spoilers - such as most book reviews include - or they may even just be seeking bibliographic information about the novel: things like its publishing history, whether it is part of a series, and so on.

I don't think spoiling information should be banned, however: I think a far better solution would be to segregate spoiling information in some way that is clearly labelled, so that people can make an informed choice, having been plainly warned of the content they are about to encounter if they go ahead.

This could be done either by using a separate page for the spoiling information, or at least by some clear warning at the top of the paragraphs or sections concerned. I would be tempted to do this to this article, but I know it would be reversed within days or hours, and I might be rebuked for it.

But I suppose I'm preaching to the wind, because Wikipedia seems almost unanimously to take the exact opposite view of this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.J.E. (talk • contribs) 04:01, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I completely agree with you. I modified the section titled "plot". I have given a very broad description of the initial context of the story; the procession toward the major dramatic plot points, and the resolution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.58.157.24 (talk) 23:53, 25 May 2023 (UTC)