Now that you mention it, I've avoided the article in the exact same way. Without the spoiler talk, I probably would have visited already. Although it's something like an irritable mental gesture... it's not like I have any plans to see the play anytime in the foreseeable future, and I haven't read any Agatha Christie since I was a teenager.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Carcharoth <[email protected]>wrote: > On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 6:34 PM, David Levy <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Carcharoth wrote: > > > >> Surely if the ending is still described in the article (as I was > >> careful to say), NPOV wouldn't be affected? All I'm saying is that if > >> there was a specific OTRS request that could be verified to be from > >> the relevant people, then it could be acted on. Requests from > >> Wikipedia editors and readers to add spoiler notices wouldn't count. > >> It would have to be a specific request from the "subject" of the > >> spoiler. > > > > You've noted that "requests from Wikipedia editors and readers to add > > spoiler notices wouldn't count," and this only accentuates the > > problem. How would providing special treatment to a representative of > > an article's subject constitute a neutral approach? > > > > You referred to this as a "BLP-like exception," but I see nothing > > analogous. We address legitimate complaints by ensuring that > > biographies of living persons comply with our normal content > > standards. We don't honor requests to include special text (such as a > > warning that the article includes material that its subject dislikes). > > Actually, I'd like to read the article about the play without finding > out the ending. Is that an unreasonable thing to ask? (And yes, I know > this is a completely different argument to the one I used before). > With other things, I just read the articles anyway, and don't care > about knowing the ending in advance (or I avoid them, as I did when > the last Harry Potter book came out). But for some reason, here I find > myself (as a reader of Wikipedia) wanting to be able to read the other > parts of the article and would likely have read the article after > reading the newspaper story if I hadn't found out in advance (from the > newspaper story) that the article contained a spoiler. Put it this > way: my finding out that this article contains a spoiler means I have > avoided reading it - how many other people have avoided reading it for > the same reasons? If that is a feature and not a bug, fair enough, but > I find it strange that what articles I read on Wikipedia is being > decided by what a newspaper article has to say about them. > > Carcharoth > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
