Violations of the Spoiler Policy

im pretty sure having potholes in spoilers has been declared by mods to be against spoiler policy, but as ~𝕋𝕒𝕓𝕤 pointed out to me, that's not actually on the Handling Spoilers page at all. i also can't find the specific mod posts that set that practice. am i remembering completely wrong or is this another instance of an Administrivia page being out of date?

Rule Was changed to allow it

A Year ago Since no one ever actually listened to that no potholes in spoilers rule Anyway.

Plus the main issue which was that you'll be spoiled if you hover over the pothole was fixed. So there was no point to it anymore.

Edited by miraculous on Aug 24th 2019 at 11:39:44 AM

Oh, I remember that rules. The page is out of date, but I was part of the discussion. The issue is you can hover over an actual trope linked, which completely makes the spoiler pointless. So whether it's a pothole in a spoiler or a spoilered trope, they come with the same issue, being pointless in actually spoilering anything.

A lot of these pages don't reflect some newer rules. So the confusion is understandable.

It used to be on Handling Spoilers, but since then, an update has changed how spoiler tags work so that having links under them isn't problematic anymore.

EDIT: Wow, double-

Edited by Zuxtron on Aug 24th 2019 at 2:39:07 PM

thanks for the clarification, yall. ive sent a fair few notifiers in the past month or so about this, so that's egg on my face. i can't un-send them, though, so ill just have to do better henceforth.

Though either way, spoilering out trope names isn't acceptable. I don't think that was changed in the update, though.

Resident Evil 7: Biohazard and its subpages all need major spoiler cleanup, and i don't have the energy to do it right now. help would be appreciated.

also, it has spoilers on its Trivia page. are Trivia pages supposed to be spoilers off? i don't think ive seen spoilers on any other Trivia page.

It is not listed under there. It is for other subpages, like Crowning Moments and Sugar Wiki stuff, as well as Fridge and Headscratchers.

Trivia seems pointless to have it on as it's not even in the actual work itself. They're additional things that are cut content or otherwise. Sure, sometimes cut content could hint as an actual spoiler at some point, but... still. We could just say "possibly has spoilers" at the top, though that is a bit of bad writing to some degree.

RE 7 actually does have spoilers on its Trivia page, specifically The Other Darrin for a character who isn't revealed to be in the game until literally the last scene.

Edited by razorrozar7 on Aug 24th 2019 at 5:56:58 AM

I can see where that has some logic to it.

Anyway, it's a policy question, so I can put up the question of how to handle Trivia pages in a Wiki Talk thread first. I just have to check if we have one up and all.

Right now, Trivia pages are allowed to have spoilers, so it should be marked or outright warn about spoilers. It's kind of easy to fix at the moment; just warn that it has spoilers. That way it fits under the current policy.

(I rewrote this message caused I derped and forgot these threads are not for outright discussing a policy's rules, so much as applying the current one fairly).

Edited by Irene on Aug 24th 2019 at 8:02:36 AM

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/query.php?parent_id=79549&type=att

In light of this thread I think we need discussion on spoiling things that are still only available to a small portion of the audience due to a specific dub getting released early. Particularly when it's a case where it's not even been released it's own native language yet like this one.

Just to note, the earlier work in question was actually a leak. That is, the ATT in the above post is a bit outdated. So we don't have to worry about troping the MLP final episodes yet either way.

But yes, we should discuss the policy a bit more on that. I can see a valid concern about troping it earlier than the original place it was created in as a legitimate way to go about it. Recaps are one thing, of course. Those are blatantly warned to have no spoilers and we shouldn't have to wait on that necessarily(though it being consistent with the regular time to trope a page is fair too).

That said, could you fully bring up your points overall, Cryptid Productions? That way we can respond to them a bit more clearly. :)

Irene, did you ever make that policy thread we talked about above, or did you find one?

I never made a policy thread. It was asked that Cryptid could make one.

Nombretemdo actually said we should hash it out in here. Maybe I misunderstood what they meant. I'm perfectly fine with moving this to a Wiki Talk thread(to clarify, the new search engine is reallllllllllllly bad, so I'll take a search for one as soon as I hit "post").

There's this one, which was active till 2015, and that's kind of... it? The rest were much more specific questions. It might be better to make a new one, maybe?

Edited by Irene on Aug 27th 2019 at 8:35:18 AM

i mean, if nombre says we should do it here, im fine with that. i just didn't want to let the discussion fizzle out.

My take on it is, If the information is valid and the spoilers are marked as they should be, there's no problem.

Aren't the rules clear that if something is a leak, we don't mention it at all anywhere on the wiki, except maybe in the trivia tab under Content Leak after it's officially released?

EDIT: I may have misinterpreted the discussion topic. I'm rather ambivalent on Short Run in Peru scenarios.

Edited by Zuxtron on Aug 27th 2019 at 9:43:37 AM

ive always been of the opinion that the fewer spoiler tags there are, the better. Trivia pages are far more relevant to those who are familiar with the work than those who aren't, so imo they should be "read at your own risk".

Yeah, to clarify, we don't mean leaks. We mean "released earlier in a country besides where the show normally runs" in the current situation Cryptid Productions is talking about.

And I misread the mod statement. They did not say to take it to this thread for the policy question. They said to "hash out the particulars", referring to the current page.

That said, should we use the topic I linked or make a new one? I feel an entirely new thread to discuss the policy might not be a bad idea.

yeah, bumping a three year old topic doesn't sit right with me.

Make a new thread, definitely.

Alright, now here's the annoying part...

I really never made a thread in Wiki Talk before. Unfortunately, I really don't know the best way to do so. >.< Like, I can barely picture the ideas, but this is one of those areas I'm really bad at. I can easily discuss something for a while, but starting the discussion is not my forte.

...Yeah, I know, I feel like I'm putting the weight on somebody else's shoulders over my suggestion. ._.;

no worries. ill do it, unless Jay wants to.

Go ahead, Raz.

boop