On Fri, 1 Jun 2007, Steve Bennett wrote:
Net outcome:
If your article needs {{spoiler}}, it's defective enough
it may as well be tagged {{cleanup}}.
Is that a change to the guideline, or just your reading of the
apparent consensus on the talk page? I'd obviously rather remove my
own toenails than read the entire discussion, but I don't want to be
totally ignorant.
It's a real pity that I feel so strongly at odds with consensus. That
hasn't happened for me with Wikipedia before. I do feel that there is
a place for spoiler warning tags on most articles about fictional
subjects, and I don't accept that "a plot summary inherently contains
spoilers so don't read it if you don't want the spoilers".
I don't see any actual consensus here. The biggest claim of consensus is "if
you don't revert my thousands of changes, that shows there's consensus for
them". The new guideline was pretty much forced through, with objections
allowed on its exact details but none on "we don't need this".