Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Outreach/June 2007 Newsletter

Spoiler controversy ... a new direction?
I'm disappointed that recent (past 6 months) edits to the spoiler tag have taken some of the "pith" out of it. It used to say spoiler warning: plot or ending details follow, or words to that effect that alerted readers that reading the section would spoil any surprises. (E.g. MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS, SLEUTH, THE OTHER, WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION, THE CRYING GAME, MEMENTO, THE PRESTIGE, et al). Now the new, softer, mushier wording is indeed redundant with a Synopsis section. (Although some might not think so, I do agree that the spoiler warnings bracketing any and all plot/synopsis sections were a carbunkle. I'm glad to see 99% of them go. I just wish there wasn't such bitter resistance to the few reinstatements where editors felt they were appropriate.) So ... how do we highlight spoilers in a film article? There are those who strongly argue that encyclopedic articles on fiction works should discuss any surprises or elements candidly, and readers should know this. I'm don't make such suppositions about either our articles or the reader. We can't in my view; any kind of reader with any depth of interest will come here. The least we can do is be open about what is presented.

That said ... are there any ideas or suggestions on "wrapping" the spoilers in the few fiction works that hinge upon big surprises in a new way? We don't want to condescend to any reader, but since the anti-spoiler advocates dislike that form, is there a way that we can gently inform the new WP reader that ... "reading this synopsis will disclose plot twists which may disrupt your enjoyment of the work." (My feeble definition of a spoiler.) TIA, David Spalding (  ☎   ✉   ✍  ) 21:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)