Forum:Return of the Spoilers

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Return of the Spoilers
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 24 June 2012 by AndorinKato.
Previous threads: Spoilers by AndorinKato, When and where should we use spoilers by Degenret01, and Spoiler Policy by Kudos 2 U

There's been a number of debates over the years about whether the wiki is spoiler free or not. The way I see it, this is an encyclopedic wiki. Our policies support that. Our goal is to provide as much information to the reader as possible, in a manner very similar to Wikipedia, which also has no spoiler alerts of any kind.

Thus, I think we need to be all or nothing. Are we an encyclopedic wiki or not? If we are, the spoiler template has no purpose here. Yes, several other wikis use such a template, but the point isn't to compare us to the Bioshock wiki, but to an encyclopedic wiki such as Wikipedia, from which we heavily borrow many policies and writing styles.

Spoilers are inevitable here. We have an uncountable number of spoilers that just slip in. Not to mention links that redirect to pages entirely about the spoiling context, which won't have the spoiler template on them. Even where the spoiler template is used, an image below it is far more eye catching than the template.

Thus the proposal itself: I'm proposing we delete the spoiler template and modify the spoiler policy to allow any spoilers (although naturally, we'll use common sense, not trying to create spoilers unrelated to the page just for the sake of making spoilers), and prohibit marking spoilers.

I believe that worrying about spoiler alerts, in other words, self-censorship, negatively impacts our ability to deliver information to the reader, as it forces us to write as though some events have not occurred, and can prevent us from being able to explain why some events happened, simply out of worry of tripping off a spoiler.

TL;DR version: Nuke the spoiler template, revise the spoiler policy. Let there be spoilers galore.

Discussion

Support - As nominator. Hofmic Talk 19:16, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Support allowing spoilers everywhere - The currently policy is stupid and gray. Obviously there are some people who support it and others who blatantly oppose it. I don't like spoilers but it's all or nothing here. We can't UCS to determine it obviously, seeing the past RfMs and RfSs. All the other large wikis clearly state they are not spoiler-free and keep the information concise and to the point. We should do the same and stop beating around the bush. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 19:20, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose - I don't really care if we are like wikipedia or not, we are meant to help users on runescape. Some users don't want to be spoiled when they're reading information on npc's or items. So, I see no reason to remove it. Hair 19:22, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Support - First of all, the choice of the word nuke makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. All joking aside, however, we are an encyclopedia. One of the basic premises of an encyclopedia is that we are here to provide information. Anyone who comes to our site as a reader is looking for information. Unless the reader has completed the game (or all quests, as most spoilers pertain to quests), he is aware that by coming here, he will most likely encounter a spoiler. The onus should be on the reader to avoid encyclopedic sites if he wishes to avoid spoilers, not on the encyclopedia to deliberately squirrel away information. --LiquidTalk 19:39, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Female readers don't even come into consideration then? --Henneyj 20:30, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
If you care that much you can replace "he" with "he or she." --LiquidTalk 20:49, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
He is generally accepted as being the default pronoun. "They" is grammatically incorrect, and using "he or she" is just long-winded and being an excessively politically correct person. 222 talk 00:47, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
'They' is not grammatically incorrect. bad_fetustalk 08:22, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
"They" most definitely is grammatically incorrect. I am not interested to pandering to political correctness so I prefer to use the grammatically correct and historical standard of using the masculine pronoun. --LiquidTalk 04:11, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
Not really, but, you know, whatever. (wszx) 06:20, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
The link I gave would also show you that "they" is the historical standard. bad_fetustalk 21:00, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
Instead of saying he or she, just say "the reader", or anything like that. Or, make it plural, about the readers, and use "they" (like, "unless the readers have completed the game ... they are aware..."). kthxbai JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 11:59, May 29, 2012 (UTC)

Strong Support - tbh, I always found having spoiler alerts everywhere annoying rather than helpful. For one thing, I highly doubt anyone notices the spoiler template before noticing the information below anyways. (I personally don't.) Second, I honestly do not see why the hell anyone would bother reading an article on the wiki if they do not expect spoilers. If I went on wikipedia and read Harry Potter's plot summary, I'd clearly want to read spoilers. The same principle applies here. Thirdly, some articles are split because they are spoilers. That accomplishes nothing else than causing the articles to become a mess for the reader to follow. For these reasons, I strongly support allowing spoilers on the wiki. Thank you for your time. bad_fetustalk 19:40, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Support - It's an encyclopedia. Spoilers are bound to be here and expected. Blaze_fire.png12.png 19:44, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Free use of spoilers - We are, first and foremost, an enyclopedia, not a novel. Ronan Talk 19:45, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Support spoilers - I'm not all that keen on removing the template though. While I can see the point of removing the template - it's annoying - people may get annoyed that they were not given any warning on say updates to a character's role in a new quest. Also, with your references to other wikis, I don't believe that really has anything to do with this discussion, as RS:NOT clearly states that we are our own wiki, and that we are not bound to the style of any other wiki or wikipedia, even if we do borrow heavily from them What I've done Ciphrius Kane Talk 20:13, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

True, I mostly meant the "other wikis" statement to mean that just because some other wikis use such a template doesn't mean we should follow suit. Likewise, I'd like to see us adopt a Wikipedia-like approach to spoilers, namely something similar to Wikipedia's no disclaimers in articles policy. We have a general disclaimer and I fail to see any reason we would need any in-article disclaimers, which only distract the reader from the context of the article. The fact that the wiki is user-generated, as the general disclaimer states, should be enough. Hofmic Talk 20:35, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
Oh, yeah, and that disclaimer should be expanded to cover, say, spoiler, potentially inappropriate content that may appear, etc (though technically, they could be considered covered by "user generated"). Hofmic Talk 20:44, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
Another misuse of the RS:NOT policy. RS:NOT applies when users attempt to implement rules that are found elsewhere, the example being Wikipedia, NOT when they suggest that a rule from Wikipedia should be implemented as part of a Yew Grove discussion. Everyone really should read the policy before quoting it, as I'm yet to see a proper use of the policy. 222 talk 00:47, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
We should have a notice on the mainpage like all the other wikis do it. Perhaps have a popup box for a while if this thread passes. Other than that, we shouldn't have to take responsibility for our readers (by using the template). It's not like they'll stop using us if they see a spoiler. Can't think of any other fansite that hides spoilers. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 06:41, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
Can't think of another fansite that would need spoiler alerts. Most of them just do guides and it's a given that a guide, especially for a quest, will be a spoiler. cqm talk 08:16, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
Yes, nobody wants to put {{Spoiler Alert|players who have at least started Cook's Assistant}} at the top of Cook's Assistant. >.> (btw, there is a big chance that you clicked that link, even though you know every detail of the quest and did it years ago - you just like clicking links, don't you?) User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 19:15, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - I think the spoiler template on the [[w:c:finalfantasy|final fantasy wiki]] is much better than our own. See [[w:c:finalfantasy:Squall_Leonhart#Story|here]] for an example. --Henneyj 20:39, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

While I believe spoiler alerts don't belong on our wiki, I agree that the Final Fantasy wiki definitely does it better. The alert is much smaller, doesn't have an ugly red box, and lets you skip over the section. Hofmic Talk 20:50, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
I like that, only if it were just a bit more noticeable. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 15:22, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

Support - We are an encyclopaedia. 222 talk 00:47, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

Hell no - I really don't see the problem. It's not like we're not showing spoilers. We are, in all of their great, glorious detailedness, only we put a little mark above them to ensure the people know they're spoilers and are given the choice to read or not. It's not an annoying pop-up, it's not a disease, it doesn't force you to not read stuff, just warns you that something is coming that could spoil your fun in doing your current quest or whatever. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 15:22, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

It actually affects the article quite a lot. The information on a page gets very messy if a spoiler template is going to be used as the spoiler-y bit can only go under the spoiler template. For instance, you can't start Ali the Wise's article by telling the reader he's Wahsietel as that'd belong under the spoiler template whereas trying to follow all that simply wastes time for the average reader. Moreover, some articles even get split to not have spoilers, which makes those articles very hard to follow. Since the spoiler template is completely pointless as anyone that visits the wiki will want to read spoilers, and since they are harmful as I told you above, they need to be abolished. bad_fetustalk 16:10, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
The last statement is nonsense. Not everyone visiting the wiki is prepared to have parts of the game spoiled for them, not even close. Since I don't think we're getting anywhere with this, I propose we create a survey to ask unregistered users for their opinion. Since it is a survey for us and not for Wikia, the results would matter. After all, we should do what our visitors want. Also, I disagree that it makes an article messy. It just adds a template with the height of about two lines. Also, you wouldn't even need to start Ali's article saying he's Wahisietel. That'd go under the RotM or 18th Ritual or a similarly called heading, and that heading should (or in your opinion shouldn't) have a spoiler template above it to make sure people don't find out something they may not wish to. And split articles aren't hard to follow at all. As long as they are written decently and organised well enough, and I'm willing to correct any mistakes in doing so, they can be like any other normal article. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 18:50, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
If I was personally writing an article for Ali the Wise I would start it along the lines - Ali the Wise, also known as Wahiseitel, is <insert content here>. Omitting such a basic part of his personality with the reason of not wanting to spoil is, in my opinion, absurd. cqm talk 22:42, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
That's not omitting it. It's moving it. Anyway, this is the reason why I think we should create a survey and do what our visitors want. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 05:24, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
But the lead paragraph is meant to sum up the object of the page. I'd expect the lead object for an NPC to summarize the most important things about this NPC. And in the case of Ali the Wise, the number one most important thing is that he's a mahjarrat is disguise. Moving such information for the sake of avoiding spoilers is omitting it (if only from the most important paragraph on the page). Hofmic Talk 09:36, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
Even so if that could potentially ruin the quest/storyline/experience/whatever for the reader? So yes, seeing that we won't be agreeing with each other in the foreseeable future, making a survey seems like the best idea now. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 11:05, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
Also, for how many months was it suspected that Ali the Wise was a mahjarrat? Even before the character model was released it was a widely known and subscribed to theory. What you're essentially saying with this is that now the dual identities have been confirmed it should be removed from the trivia (where no one in their right mind would mark it as a spoiler) and insert a large spoiler notice all because the theory has been confirmed. I'm sorry, but that really doesn't make sense to me.
I was also under the impression that pages undergoing a nomination for merging/splitting/deletion were tagged with a corresponding template noting that nomination. Surely if a visitor really cared about it they would comment. cqm talk 08:20, May 28, 2012 (UTC)

Go forth and spoil - Per my comments above. From long term use of the Future Update forums where lore is traditionally discussed those who play spoiler free are an overwhelming minority. A simple disclaimer is enough warning for me and we are an encyclopaedia after all. cqm talk 22:42, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

But the spoiler template IS a simple disclaimer. Sure, we could put it at the top of an article and just mix everything in, but that would mean that players who do not wish information to be spoiled won't read the article. Using Spoiler Alert and Spoiler End, people can skip the parts they don't want to read and enjoy the rest. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 10:49, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
On the other hand, maybe you're right. Hence my survey idea. I can make one, but where to put it? User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 10:54, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
Annoy Cook into making one similar to the one he did for the Wikia search changes? I can't remember the site he used for it. cqm talk 22:41, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
He either used http://www.surveymonkey.com/ or http://www.kwiksurveys.com/ . Personally, I think it'd be easier to make a form on http://docs.google.com/ and when you're ready to show the results, then you hand out the link. Hair 12:13, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
I normally use Polldaddy though, but I don't think it really matters. Where to put it though? User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 13:22, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
Chat doesn't help. I'd appreciate if someone put this on a noticeable spot. http://scrachasniff.polldaddy.com/s/spoiler-warnings-yay-or-nay User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 16:02, May 29, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - Just a notice, don't (request to) close this thread before the results^ have been discussed. Smile User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 13:22, May 29, 2012 (UTC)

Exactly how can we view the results of the poll? And um, why exactly are we using a poll? JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 11:05, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
Polls are the best method of determining the view of our unregistered readers. We are not using this poll to determine consensus, but as a research tool to identify the best way to move forward. I think that is within the bounds of the consensus policy. 222 talk 11:21, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
I will publish the results when I get any, but the poll must be placed somewhere noticeable first. Site notice/Wiki news? User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 13:56, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - Spoilers should just be made the same colour as the background, so when you select it shows up. --Cake detail.pngCaek iz ossumChocolate cake detail.png talk om nom 05:16, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

There also should be a template for this. Also, we're not really an encyclopedia, we're more of a fansite. Plus, we'd make people angry if we did this. --Cake detail.pngCaek iz ossumChocolate cake detail.png talk om nom 00:23, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
As our Spoiler policy says, "Above all else, we are an encyclopedia that provides information about RuneScape." So yeah, there's that. Blaze_fire.png12.png 07:22, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
It's very important that we don't try and hide content in our page. If they don't want spoilers, they can stick with Jagex's crap. As per the quoted line above, which was added by consensus, the ability to show information trumps the need to hide spoilers (and I am in the belief that there is zero need to hide spoilers). In the event this thread doesn't pass, I'd much rather we convert to the less obtrusive spoiler template used by the final fantasy wiki, linked above. Hofmic Talk 23:49, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
So, what does this mean now? When does Fswe1's poll end, if it was started? Blaze_fire.png12.png 05:58, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
I have 123 entries now, I say let's get 200 or more at least. Current statistics: 20% is in favour of this thread and wants the templates deleted, a total of 80% wants the spoiler warning and paragraph separations to stay, be it for themselves, be it for people who skip spoiler even if they don't and, in the comments section, I've seen "make spoiler sections collapsible" quite often. We should discuss the latter I think. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 06:54, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
There are multiple questions in the poll and you're just giving percentages for one question. Could you just let others view results of the poll? JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 20:30, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
How will that even effect consensus? sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 20:31, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
I don't even know how this entire poll which is supposed to get, according to fswe, ~323 votes, is going to affect this thread, and I was surprised we even had the poll, I just thought people thought this poll would help. If nobody actually does anything with this poll, why exactly do we even have it? JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 20:38, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

(reset) RS:C is not relevant in this instance. It's not being used to determine the outcome of this thread, as Aaron has said above we're using it to take a random sample of unregistered users (at least I think that's who this poll is directed towards) to gather opinions, which is a perfectly sound idea, although it would be nice if we could view the full results of it ourselves <.< Ronan Talk 21:20, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. I'd like to see the full results, even though I don't think it's changing my opinion. Blaze_fire.png12.png 06:09, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
Ugh. I will post the results, all of them, when I close the survey, the time for which you may decide. I'd say somewhere by the end of this week. The above post was just to show current notable statistics. Once again, you'll have access to all results. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 16:08, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
We can't decide when to close a poll if we have no idea how many people are participating in it. To repeat myself, it would be far preferable if the poll results could be viewed as they are collected. I have no idea why there's such an issue with that. Ronan Talk 17:49, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
I'm afraid that's not possible without me having to share login details with you. Only thing I can say is 165 responses now. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 13:00, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

Support - I agree with Liquid and Hofmic - if users come for, say, a quest guide, they obviously expect a quest guide - i.e. what's going to happen and what they should do. If one wants to do the quest properly and find out what's going to happen for themselves, one probably would not come seeking a quest guide. 9xFavoY.pngI wish I was Scuzzy Betahib8CAd.pngHe's a lot cooler and also smells like flowers I hearOil4 I made this 13:42, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

I think this policy is not about quest guides, but rather pages about characters that are both in quests and out of them, such as the article on Nomad. Quest guides are already spoiler central Wink  a proofreader ▸  00:34, June 15, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - I must really question why on earth we are using a poll here. Per RuneScape:Consensus, we don't vote on things here. The filled out radial box selections of an anonymous user has little bearing on me. Polls might be great for choosing a logo or trying to convince Wikia how incompetent it is (okay, maybe not so great), but this is a complex issue. There's a number of underlying reasons for the spoilers versus encyclopedia issue. We've always used consensus in the past to make major changes to the site, and I see no reason we should be abolishing that now to make this decision. I understand that IPs make up the majority of our audience, but I also believe that the editors of this wiki are capable of making decisions with them in mind. You'll notice many comments above mention what the people come to this site looking for.

Thus, I don't believe the results of the poll, whatever they may be (as they're rather hidden at the time), are practical for deciding the outcome of this thread. The poll uses pre-filled comments and asks the reader to select one option that best suites them, without a proper explanation for reasons to remove these spoilers. The poll fails to satisfy the needs for consensus. In fact, one of the reasons we use consensus is so people won't just look at the title and vote on something without being fully aware of the details. Consensus is an important pillar of our decision making, and using this poll just undermines that pillar. Hofmic Talk 02:09, June 6, 2012 (UTC)

As I've said before, we are not using polls to determine consensus, but as a reference to help editors decide on the position they wish to adopt in the thread. It complies perfectly with RS:C. 222 talk 06:19, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
While the results of the poll will likely fail to make me change my stance, it is fine with RS:C as brains explained twice now. The poll is supposed to provide you with information as to what the reader would like, which could be used as a point in the discussion. However, since it does not determine the outcome of this thread in any way, it does not violate the rule. bad_fetustalk 19:36, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
It would be a lot easier if people could stop panicking over a poll and focus on the actual topic at hand. Ronan Talk 21:25, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
So, I think this could safely be closed right now without the poll... When will we get to see the results? Post them so we can move on. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 19:06, June 8, 2012 (UTC)
I am back from Belgium. I will post them today. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 07:17, June 9, 2012 (UTC)

Question - We have had numerous RfSs and RfMs regarding spoilers. What do we do regarding the consensus gained for those individual articles, in relation to the outcome of this thread? If this were to pass, and we allow spoilers, should we re-merge all of those articles we agreed to split? sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 19:06, June 8, 2012 (UTC)

Post-survey discussion

Results are out here. I recommend to read all of the comments, since some are quite interesting. I know that the results of the poll are not be used to form consensus and we don't count votes and all other relevant policies I could quote, but I DO think we should do what the majority of our viewers want. In this case, that is to leave things as they are or even to hide spoilers/make them collapsible, which even I think goes a bit too far. In conclusion, I'm not saying we should do exactly what the results want, but the outcome of this thread SHOULD please as many of our viewers as possible (and not the... what is it, 20%(?) that would be happy if the thread were closed now). User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 07:46, June 9, 2012 (UTC)

My opinion hasn't changed. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 23:29, June 10, 2012 (UTC)
The percentages don't seem to match across the various questions when comparing how certain opinions would answer the questions. For instance, question 3 essentially says that a quarter of those who took the poll do not ever spoil the story for themselves. However, question 4 suggests that style of gameplay is found in around half of those who answered. Question 7 blurs those who don't read spoilers and those who relate to them, but essentially describes almost 9/10 readers not wishing to spoil the game for themselves or others. In summary the poll seems somewhat flawed due to the lack of correlation between the results or each question. To quote the above "My opinion hasn't changed". cqm talk 23:47, June 10, 2012 (UTC)
I am unsure what you mean. The general outcome of most of the questions, how I've interpreted it, is that the large majority of our viewers either doesn't wish for the templates to be deleted for themselves or for others. I personally belong to the latter; I don't care about spoilers, but others evidently do and I don't think we can decide for them. After all, the current templates don't hurt anyone. They don't hide information. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 14:31, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I still support spoiler template removal. Blaze_fire.png12.png 01:01, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
In a nutshell, by passing these proposals, we're ruining a part of the wiki for a large majority of our viewers (the no-voters of Q7), as evidenced by lots of comments given. Sure, I understand that none of the people in this thread care much for spoiler alerts, but others do and the alerts don't hurt you. My two cents. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 14:39, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
My point was the lack of correlation between results of individual questions, not the overall message the poll gives. Also, the poll does not point out the fact that the wiki is an encyclopaedic source of information, something the discussion on this forum's discussion has taken into account but none of the comments on the poll have. cqm talk 14:45, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
Point taken, but being an encyclopaedia does not necessarily mean being a very bureaucratic one that doesn't respect its viewers'/readers' preferences. I seriously doubt that more than 2 people who voted pro spoiler warnings would change opinion if told "Yes, but we're an encyclopaedia ergo one can and should expect all information without petty warnings!" - more like "O... kay... Good for you, now I still don't want to know SPOILER ALERT Lucien dies before he does in-game.". User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 15:02, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

Since when do we run polls to determine consensus? 16px‎AtlandyBeer.png 23:39, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

We don't. cqm talk 23:47, June 10, 2012 (UTC)
Just ignore everything I've written about this topic on this discussion why not? 222 talk 01:55, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
We don't. I just wanted to know the viewers' general opinion and post it here so that we know what we're doing. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 14:39, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

If a viewer wants to give their opinion, isn't that what the yew grove is for?16px‎AtlandyBeer.png 17:08, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

In theory yes. But how many anons have you seen over the years that have contributed to Yew Grove discussions? I think there have been more responses to this opinion poll than anon comments on the Yew Grove since I first joined. Instead of living in an idealistic wiki, where anons love contributing to discussions and post grammatically accurate, fully wikified opinions. Be realistic. 200+ users aren't suddenly going to comment on this thread because they don't give enough of a damn to do so. Their indifference level is low enough to justify ticking some boxes in a quick poll, but not enough to post a properly written paragraph. 222 talk 07:10, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

Okay - The consensus of this thread will be determined by those who commented on the thread, not the poll. The purpose of the poll was to give some insight to the commenters of this thread. So stop bringing it [email protected]$# I want to close this soon so I can start another thread (possibly, depending on the outcome of this thread) so if anyone has changed their mind in regards to the poll, or just in general, please say so! sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 03:36, June 13, 2012 (UTC)

Closed. TL;DR: The current spoiler policy will remain unchanged. The [[Template:Spoiler alert|spoiler alert template]] will be deleted, and links to the spoiler policy will be placed on the main page, in the General Disclaimer, and possibly in the anon bubble.

What I am seeing as a result of this discussion is that we must not sacrifice content quality in favor of preventing spoilers. It was stated several times that we are an encyclopedia; indeed, the current spoiler policy states that our mission of providing accurate and relevant content is a larger concern than hiding spoilers. This is the consensus that we have reached in the past, and it matches my own personal feelings on the subject. It is against our mission to hide or obscure spoilerific content in any way, as doing so compromises the quality of our content.

That said, the spoiler template is not necessary. It will be removed from any articles in which it is used, and deleted. However, I do recognize a need for users, particularly our thousands of unregistered users, to at least know about our policies regarding spoilers. Therefore a link to the spoiler policy shall be placed in a visible place. My suggestions are to place links on the main page somewhere, in the general disclaimer, and in the anon bubble. Other locations, such as the sitenotice, would be fine, but remember that the point is to make the spoiler policy as visible to our users as possible.

Because of the amount of attention that Fswe's poll has received in this discussion, I figure I should address it. As the closing admin for this thread, I am disregarding the poll. There is a fundamental difference between our discussion-based, consensus-based system, and a majority-opinion-based poll that requires voters to choose one of a few predefined responses. The two methodologies for collecting information are incompatible, and it is for this reason that our consensus policy prohibits voting. As Brains has stated multiple times in this thread, the survey is to have no official weight whatsoever; therefore, it carries none in my closing decision. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 03:14, June 24, 2012 (UTC)