>That's such a famous case, and honestly, since
when did the plot of
>Star Wars affect anyone's enjoyment of it? Similarly, I don't see how
>you can "spoil" the plot of a Friends episode.
>The cases that bug me more are long books, where
knowing the >>ending
>would really put you off reading it. Or certain films like Fight Club,
>the Sixth Sense, Unbreakable etc...it's not so much "knowing how >>the
>film ends", but "knowing the secret that totally changes your
>interpretation of the film". - Steve
Steve, how are we as editors to know this..? As I do recall in a previous encounter
concerning a lad I went to school with, he and I posessed very different views on what a
"spoiler" was.
As neutral editors, we also have a differing capacity on content is a plot twist or
what is considered the climax. It is only reasonable to conclude this is what happens.
This template simply smacks of what intrepretation is left to the editor.
Second, what does this have to do with the well-being of the encyclopedia..? This is
quite a presumption. "Well, as a neutral editor of wikipedia, I happen to believe
this spoils me, so I'll make the unfounded assumption and believe that to be the same
for the article, its content and the readers." Excuse me..? What edvidence is there
to support this...? Perhaps there is support for this by comments from our readers that
wikipedia is the place for a brief read..? Or a quick gander across three sentences..? Or
a look at the pretty pictures..? That's not an encyclopedia at all. Why would read an
encyclopedia if you didn't want information...?
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.