Tropes are not adequately spoiler-tagged

One of the primary arguments for not spoilering trope names is that you don't know if you want to see it until you've highlighted it, but I don't think this would be the case with a little forethought: If the only exceptions are tropes that are inherently spoilery, such as ending tropes or, say, The Hero Dies, then those are automatically something you don't want to read if you haven't completed the work.

To word it differently, I think tropes that need context in order to spoil should have their trope names unaltered, while tropes that spoil without context should have the trope name spoilered as well. This greatly limits the number of exceptions and the complexity involved in enforcing the hypothetical new policy.

It should be clear, but I'm concerned with the main page rather than character pages.

edited 23rd Sep '14 8:54:02 PM by TripleSRank

"New Policy"? "Complexity"?

It's not really new, and it's not complex at all: Don't spoiler-tag trope names on work pages and don't spoiler-tag work names on trope pages. How is coming up with some list of tropes that can be spoiler-tagged that every editor will have to memorize making it less complex?

Context, please. "The hypothetical new policy" is referring to the policy change I'm proposing right now, and "less complex" is in comparison to the other ideas for preventing spoilers on the main work page while still fulfilling a troper's job.

I also think you're over-exaggerating how hard it would be to "memorize" which tropes would be spoilered this way. It's pretty obvious if a trope is an ending trope (unless you don't know the trope in the first place), and there aren't many other examples of context-free spoilers in the first place.

Well, if I read your suggestion right, you just want to spoiler tag trope names which are themselves spoilers, but for other tropes keep the ban?

Well, that will definitively be more complex than a blanket ban. Also, seeing as spoilers are in the eye of the beholder, we still have the "I have to uncover the spoiler to see if it's even worth reading" problem.

That is correct. I'm not sure what you're referencing by "blanket ban", though. I take it to either mean 1) the current policy to simply spoiler the content after the trope name or 2) a ban on all potential spoiler tropes as opposed to certain ones. If it's the first, then it certainly is going to be more complex, though I think the simple rule attached to it (that it only applies to trope titles which are themselves spoilers) is enough to keep it from being overly-complex. If it's the second, I don't agree, because rules would need to be made to determine which spoilers-in-context trope titles would need to be covered.

The "I have to uncover the spoiler to see if it's even worth reading" problem has a simple solution: Don't read spoilers until you've completed (or are up-to-date with) a given work. If you're uncovering spoilers for a work you haven't completed, it's your own fault for getting spoiled. If you don't mind spoilers in the first place, then I don't see the issue. It only takes a moment to uncover a spoiler, and it's possible to turn off the spoiler feature entirely if you register, as is so helpfully popped up whenever a mouse cursor hovers over a spoiler ("you can set spoilers visible by default on your profile").

The blanket ban is the current policy, yeah.

Don't read spoilers until you've completed (or are up-to-date with) a given work.

How do you want to convince people to follow that? Losing a significant number of readers is not desirable.

I don't think much convincing would be in order. I'm referring more to an unspoken rule rather than an actual one. If you haven't completed a given work and don't want to be spoiled concerning it, you don't read spoilers about it. I think that is (well, should be) common sense. Even if this thought doesn't occur to someone initially, I think getting spoiled one or two times out of lack of forethought would be more than enough to convince them to not do so any longer.

The problem here is that you can be spoiled even by following that meta-rule, because some trope titles are inherently spoiler-y. This means you can't browse the page at all until you've completed the work if you don't want to be spoiled. Wouldn't that be more likely to reduce readers than simply covering the spoilers?

edited 25th Sep '14 1:35:13 PM by TripleSRank

Because this site is for Tropes not Works and having too many spoilers makes the pages look bad. I care more about fast reading then spoilers so I don't have spoilers anymore; it makes the pages look a lot better. Like it or not, there's no way to trope things if we can't talk about how they end.

Also, everyone's definition of a spoiler is different and tropes are by nature spoilerifc. In order to figure out if something is a spoiler of not, you have to read what's hidden by the spoiler tag. It's just something you have to deal with on this site. Also, just because you know what ending tropes apply to a work doesn't mean you know exactly how they'll work in the story. It's just like when you're Genre Savvy and can predict how a work is going to go just by reading the first couple chapters but still stick around to see how the author is going to end it.

Making the spoiler policy more subjective then it already is would put a bigger burden on page writers then they already have. The current policy is easy to implement and easy to remember.

Shouldn't spoiler tagged examples still contain enough unspoilered context that one can tell/infer that it's an example or not without looking at the spoilered parts?

Looking at this I have have no idea if it's an example or not without being spoilered.

• Luke, I Am Your Father: Darth Vader reveals that he is Luke's father.

With this I can see that it's an example without looking at the spoiler tagged bits.

• Luke, I Am Your Father: Darth Vader reveals to Luke on Bespin that he is the latter's father.

Spoiler tagging the parts other than the trope name is OK, although if the example can be written with less spoiler tags that should be preferred.

Saying the site is for tropes and not works is like saying a forest is for leaves and not trees. You need one to have the other. Tropes exist because of works. I don't think you're claiming the work pages are so irrelevant that they should be removed in favor of only having trope pages. Works are (or should be) of importance on their own page.

Why are you complaining if you've turned off spoilers? This proposed change wouldn't affect you. Those who don't mind the spoilers will either uncover the spoiler or do what you have. Not everyone cares more about fast reading than spoilers; are you denying that the work pages attract readers, who are more likely to not want to be spoiled?

Your next paragraphs seem to explicitly ignore the point I was making. What you personally consider a spoiler doesn't matter if ending-only/context-free trope names are covered. If you don't mind those sort of spoilers, you're good to go. If you're not, you obey the meta rule "don't uncover spoilers until you've completed the work". At that, couldn't "everyone has their own definition of spoilers" be used as an argument against the current spoiler rules as well? You aren't arguing against my specific suggestion here.

You don't necessarily need to be genre savvy to know how an ending trope will apply to the work, either. First Girl Wins is an excellent example of this. Are you suggesting all spoilers should be allowed because same cases... aren't necessarily (personally) spoilers? I'd like the site to be equally useful/entertaining for both those who have completed the work and those who haven't.

This would not be any more subjective than the current spoiler policy. I'm referring to a specific case where the trope name is a context-free spoiler.

edited 29th Sep '14 1:25:09 PM by TripleSRank

You're suggesting a "depending on the reader" subjective policy as to what is and is not considered an inherent spoiler. That's not our policy; it says that you do not spoiler-tag trope names in a work article, or work names in a trope article, ever. There's no ambiguity there.

edited 29th Sep '14 1:27:38 PM by Fighteer

To be frank, I'd prefer to not use the spoiler system at all here.

First, spoilers is a huge slippery slope on all ends. Different people have different views of what constitutes spoilers. What should be considered spoilers changes over time, as the works age and maybe enter the social consciousness.

Second, writing spoiler-tagged entries places a much higher effort on the person writing examples. More markup means a higher risk for errors, one need to consider the sentence construction to fit with the spoilered-protected words and phrases, and so on.

Third, we are here to discuss works and how they use tropes. We aren't here to review the works, but to celebrate them.

To me, a better way to handle spoilers would be to have special pages for very recent works, which are linked from the appropriate non-spoilery page. The tropes on these spoiler pages are also not crosswicked. When they are moved to their proper page, then the trope usage are added to the trope pages.

I'm inclined to agree in terms of general distaste for the spoiler system. I think that the notion of 'spoilers' as a universal thing for all media — as though every work depends on surprising the user — isn't necessarily accurate; most people go into theater and opera, for instance, already knowing how it will end.

But. In general, some of the most detailed and accurate description of a work's tropes is going to come from people who are currently watching or reading it. I mean, some stuff is only obvious in retrospect, but there's also a lot of small subtle things that you're only likely to notice while you're reading or watching, and will forget afterwards. It's to our benefit if someone who spots an obvious trope in a work they're reading can come here and quickly put it on the page. Completely removing spoilers would make it less likely that they'll do that. (Obviously editing a page risks seeing a spoiler, there's no avoiding that; but it's still safer if there's some indication of "spoiler here" etc.) So I think that we still want to retain some degree of spoiler warning to the extent that we can without interfering with the site's main purpose.

Anyway. A spoilered trope description already does a lot to hide a trope's meaning; even if someone has The Mole on their profile, the spoiler after it could say how and when it's revealed, or it could say something like how it's ultimately averted. Another option is to put a big warning at the top of the page whenever it seems like:

1. Trope names on the page are likely to be spoilers, and,

2. The work is one which you would enjoy less after spoilers (since it's based on twists, mysteries, HSQ surprises, etc.)

A single-line warning at the top is cheap and doesn't really get in anyone's way, so we should use those more often.

edited 29th Sep '14 3:01:28 PM by Aquillion

The admin also agrees that spoiler tags shouldn't be here.

The only reason why spoiler tags exist in the first place, however, is so that the majority of the readers don't get upset that they have been spoilered.

In other words, it only exists as a concession for the majority of the readers.

If it was that simple, I'd say the admin would've have the spoiler tags disabled for everyone all-together.

The option to disable spoilers on your profile page exists as a compromise so that those who don't mind spoilers (or can't read spoiler markup, for some reason) can see the page without spoiler tags.