This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. The result of the debate was inconclusive.–SentryTalk 11:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm fairly new here (though I have contributed a number of small articles) so bear with me if this has all ready been discussed to death.
It seems to me that there needs to be a change to the spoiler policy on the site. The latest info from Betrayal has prompted me to post this. It seems like it goes much too far much too early. I don't think a spoiler tag above certain info is really good enough. Not for information from a book which isn't even officially released yet. The bigger problem is that the "Dramatis Personae" section posted on the site's description of the book has a character's name with a link. When you click on that link, it redirects you and you then suddenly learn the true identity of that character, a fact which seems to be a surprise revelation in the book. Yes, maybe this link shouldn't be followed unless spoilers are wanted, but it just seems like one can far too casually ruin plot surprises for themselves.
I guess I would propose limits to how soon plot information can be posted. I realize this site isn't as tightly moderated as some sites by design, but this seems necessary to me. Maybe specific limits like, new comic book plot information cannot be added until two weeks after the a comic is released, and new information from a novel cannot be posted for a month after release.
Another reason to make this change would be potential bad reactions from Lucasfilm. When entire plots from not-yet-released materials are revealed in advance, a publisher could get upset.
Thoughts on this? Anyone want to back me up here?--JMM 14:09, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree that there have been far too many spoilers around (I'm not entirely innocent myself), and that a policy change would be preferable. But I think that better spoiler-warnings could do a great difference. Why not a spoilers sub-page on every article where it's needed? Charlii 15:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
I guess a spoiler-separate page may be better, but it may also just complicate things. Maybe this sounds weird, but I really don't like too much spoiler info to exist at all, whether a person wants it or not. It seems to be better on a message board instead of a reference site like this. Also, even if the page is separate, that may not stop you from learning about events from a word search. Though some fans like spoilers to be out there so early, I think itdoes a disservice to fans who don't want to be spoiled. Even warnings can be accidentally scrolled past. Someone shouldn't have to be on guard for spoilers while reading this site. I don't want to sound stubborn here, but a month-long after release ban seems very reasonable to me, with a shorter one for comics.--JMM 17:09, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
An enforced delay of spoilers would also help us avoid adding fake spoilers to Wookieepedia. —Silly Dan(talk) 17:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
I am against adding any limits to spoilers. There is a large spoiler warning on the front of the page, and anyone clicking on an article from an upcoming or newly-released book should expect spoilers. This just seems like the complaints of those who want it both ways. We don't want to sink to the pathetic levels of the Battlestar Wiki. Kuralyov 17:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
right from the beggining peole have been going on at me for this, i really don't understand the porblem, wookieepedia is a spoiler, there is a warning, this happened when people found out Chewie died in Vector Prime, and now its happening again, theres no need to block sections off, if people don't eant to know they should just stop reading when it gets to the section refering to Lecacy. And people should stp changing edits people make because they belive it is false, its rude for one to delete someone eles work. Jedi Dude
On the contrary, people should delete edits which they think are false, or at least question them on talk pages. —Silly Dan(talk) 17:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
i didn't mean it like that, but these wern't talked about they were just deleted, again and again and again. plus when more than one person does it its more likly not to be fanon yes? look at Vergere's article now..its a bit divided, i don't think people would be able to avoid spoilers...Jedi Dude
I guess the real problem here would be trying to "enforce" the rule. Someone would have to keep track of when things are released. But even so, I wish some general policy could be come up with. I don't want to restrict the open, community aspect of a Wikipedia. But, with or without spoiler warnings, I still think that even an understood policy of a little delay after publishing would be a good idea. It may help keep things remain reader-friendly, I think, as opposed to people having to beware while reading. People expect to be spoiled on older plots, but something not even released? I don't know, it just doesn't sit well with me. In any case, I just wanted to start (or restart) the discussion on the matter.--JMM 19:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Per Kuralyov: "There is a large spoiler warning on the front of the page [Warning: This wiki contains spoilers. Read at your own risk.], and anyone clicking on an article from an upcoming or newly-released book should expect spoilers." Usually, Wikipedia refrains from adding information about a pre-released item (not always, but usually) — especially if the content isn't backed up by primary a.k.a. official sources. In wikias, however, you usually can get away this (of course, it depends on the situation) — that's why wikias were created in the first place: to do things that you could not do in Wikipedia. I would agree with you on a policy enforcement on spoilers if you proposed it in Wikipedia, however, this is a wikia, and the main purpose of creating a wikia in the first place, to put in stark terms, was for fans to get away things that they weren't allowed to do in Wikipedia (e.g. to be able to be "fancrufty"). —Mirlen 23:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
In wikias, however, you usually can get away this (of course, it depends on the situation) — that's why wikias were created in the first place: to do things that you could not do in Wikipedia. Some of our editors don't seem to realize this and are bent into turning us into a Wikipedia clone ("But that's what Wikipedia does!!" Yeah, but we're NOT Wikipedia, so stop quoting Wikipedia policy and help us make our own policies). Anyway, back to the issue at hand. I personally feel that the warning at the top of the main page is sufficient. There are always Star Wars fans that get copies of novels before their official release date (almost always by accident), and I didn't really see anyone here complain when we had info from the Dark Nest trilogy and Outbound Flight (to name a few examples) added to the Wookiee before their release dates. Adding a limit on what info we could enter after a book's release is like a form of censorship and restricts the openness of the Wookiee (not to mention being hard to enforce). If it's info from a canon source, it belongs here, regardless of how recently it was released. StarNeptuneTalk to me! 01:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree with StarNeptune. The major spoiler banner on top of the article should warn off well enough (not to mention one more spoiler banner for Betrayal) — as you can see on Jacen's, Ben's, Vegere's, and Lumiya's pages. —Mirlen 10:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed the new "I am your father" spoiler warning on a page with Betrayal spoilers on it. I like it, especially the recently published bit. Is this a brand new one or just a second option to the regular spoiler? I think it may be enough for me to withdraw my modest proposal.:) Will the warning be changed after the book's been out for a while?--JMM 15:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
It's new — if you check the history of the major spoiler warning template, it is QuentinGeorge, one of the adminstrators of Wookieepedia, who created it on May 23rd. I'm glad to see that you're considering the banner to be good enough. As for your last question, the major spoiler banner will probably removed after it becomes old news — when that is, however, I am not sure. —Mirlen 16:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
How long should we keep the tags up for? It was discussed back in February, but we never reached a consensus. -LtNOWIS 03:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.