Forum:CT:Spoilers on QOTD

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:Spoilers on QOTD

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 amend Wookieepedia:Spoilers and Wookieepedia:Quote of the Day with suggested rule. Grunny (talk) 09:15, June 8, 2011 (UTC)

Recently, a comment was posted to Talk:Main Page complaining about the presence of a major spoiler for Conviction in today's QOTD. (quote here; MAJOR spoiler)

Therefore, I propose the following addition to Wookieepedia:Spoilers and Wookieepedia:Quote of the Day:

Quotes of the Day from newly-released sources may not appear on the Main Page until the one-month spoiler period has elapsed.

Master Jonathan — Jedi Council Chambers Tuesday, May 31, 2011, 15:43 UTC

AMENDMENT: Per Tm_T's suggestion below, the proposed wording is hereby changed to the following:

Quotes of the Day may not appear on the Main Page until at least one month after the United States release of the quote's source.

Master Jonathan — Jedi Council Chambers Tuesday, May 31, 2011, 21:10 UTC

Support

  1. Master Jonathan — Jedi Council Chambers Tuesday, May 31, 2011, 15:43 UTC
  2. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 15:54, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  3. <-Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 16:00, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Although the Social Darwinist in me would rather tell complainers to read the Spoiler notice on the top of the MP and deal with it, adhering to a one-month spoiler duration really doesn't hurt anything. Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:49, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
    • Of course the wiki has spoilers, but that doesn't mean we should be waving them around in front of people's faces. This isn't Uncyclopedia. -- I need a name (Complain here) 20:14, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  5. Green Tentacle (Talk) 17:51, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  6. I need a name (Complain here) 20:14, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  7. 1358 (Talk) 20:23, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  8. Strong support, even perhaps with "all pre-release materials included" or some other wording making it clear the final product release + 1 month with all material? –Tm_T (Talk) 20:31, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
    • Good idea. Now it just states that quotes can't appear until one month after release, without the "newly-released" specification. I'll notify all who have voted in a few minutes. Master Jonathan — Jedi Council Chambers Tuesday, May 31, 2011, 21:10 UTC
  9. Grunny (talk) 21:22, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  10. Per Toprawa.—Tommy 9281 Tuesday, May 31, 2011, 21:33 UTC
  11. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 22:02, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  12. Per all above. CC7567 (talk) 22:53, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  13. Basically per everyone above. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 23:19, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  14. While I sympathize with Culator's argument below, I think this is a common courtesy we can extend to fellow fans. ~SavageBOB sig 23:26, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  15. Menkooroo 23:44, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  16. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 00:37, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  17. Since QOTD appears on the main page, new users don't even have a chance to read our spoiler warning before being exposed to them. And the proposal shouldn't significantly impact the supply of candidates; this doesn't limit nominations, so users can still nominate as soon as they read something they think is worthy. It just goes on the queue with a date after the one-month limit when it passes. jSarek 06:27, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  18. As much as I agree with Culator that we shouldn't need to mollycoddle our readers, we shouldn't wave spoilers around so lavishly. Someone complained about there being one in the DYK a few days ago so I think that's at least a minute hint that readers don't want spoilers immediately on the main page. And for the record, only about 10% of the quotes on the queue are Conviction quotes at the time of voting, I think it's more a case of people actually being bothered to nominate varied quotes more often. NAYAYEN 10:05, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  19. Agreed. Corellian PremierRobotechAll along the watchtower 17:12, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  20. Eh. Per Bob. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 00:15, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  21. I really do get Culator's argument, and I personally don't have a problem with being spoiled, but like SavageBob said, this seems like common courtesy. Also, it just happened again. -- SFH 03:12, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  22. Wookieepedia is neither a bully nor a troll, and it's not our purview to penalize people due to their own curiosity. In any event the snowball speaks for itself. DD97Which bear is best? 04:14, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
    1358 (Talk) 07:15, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
    • Xd, methinks you may have had a small brain fart, see vote #7.—Unsigned comment by Dangerdan97 (talk • contribs)
      • Thanks for the heads up, whoever you are, I'm evidently too tired right now. :P 1358 (Talk) 19:58, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  23. Bandwagon! Trak Nar Ramble on 07:21, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  24. Imperators II(Talk) 08:41, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
    I was spoiled, so I'm represeting my own interest. Xammer 21:16, June 2, 2011 (UTC)(struck by the SIV rule, less than 50 mainspace edits. –Tm_T (Talk) 21:28, June 2, 2011 (UTC))
  25. I'm the one who complained on the main page. Obviously spoilers are on the wiki, but I only should have been spoiled if I went to Conviction's article, or a page with an "I am you're father" spoiler warning at the top. It wouldn't be a problem if the quote was about something innocuous, as opposed to a PLOT TWIST. (- -) 02:36, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
  26. My guess is that the queue is low (for both QOTD and FAs) because Wookieepedia is bleeding users. Unavoidable spoilers are only one small way to drive users away. And while I could be wrong, allowing spoilers isn't really going to solve the problem with the QOTD queue, it'll merely delay being forced to address the problem. SinisterSamurai
  27. JangFett (Talk) 05:37, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
  28. Chack Jadson (Talk) 16:34, June 5, 2011 (UTC)
  29. --Eyrezer 08:51, June 8, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. It's hard enough to keep the queue up as it is. Wikis have spoilers, that's what they do. Wookieepedia is not anyone's mommy, and it's not our job to protect people from their own curiosity. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 22:28, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Our queue is too small. Beggars can't be choosers. IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 00:46, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Given the current small size of the QOTD queue, I can't see this doing anything but hurting it. Besides, the third line on the Main Page plainly states that "...this wiki contains spoilers." Darth Karikawill destroy your planet! 14:13, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  4. —TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 14:14, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  5. I think It should stay as it is Floyd and Darth Culator have said the queue is hard enough to maintain. Also, it say before you scroll down on the main page this wiki contains spoilers so that should be enough warning for people GTQ(Problems?) 22:33, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Per the above. Korsa3 04:02, June 2, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

  • Does anyone really think that the first thing someone looks at when they view the Main Page is the top of the page? People look at the center of screens, which is why the Featured article of the day is where it is: so that people will look at it. The spolier warning at the top of the page next to "Wookieepedia", which (admit it) you don't even glance at after your first few visits if you ever did at all, is fine for "legal" reasons and warning readers about the site's natural content. However, the sheer fact that it exists is no excuse to run spoilers in the elements of the main page people actually routinely read. We're only going to needlessly piss people off this way. Since the queue is too short, nominate old quotes. They need an extra 5 votes for each nomination (which we could lower to 2 or so in another CT if need be), but is that not better than spoiling people at the door as opposed to after they pass that threshold by actually looking at articles, when we can undeniably, uncontestedly say in all fairness "we warned you"? NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 00:05, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
    • Thank you NaruHina, you expressed well what I've been thinking of this. Seriously: if you think we don't have enough old quotes, the fact won't change by complaining; go nominate and vote, thanks. –Tm_T (Talk) 08:35, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
      • That page kills my computer every time I go there (oddly even more than KOTOR). Sorry, but unless someone quote pimps at me, I have reasons not to vote there. NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 15:48, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  • Currently, this draft's definition of a spoiler is broader than the official policy's definition; if this policy were adopted as-is, (just to give an example) a non-spoilerific OOU QOTD nom coming from Leland Chee's Twitter could be shot down if it's less than a month old. Thoughts? Darth Karikawill destroy your planet! 23:05, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
  • I wish there was a "meh" section, but I can see this being a good idea. :P JangFett (Talk) 05:37, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • I propose another amendment to this quote's with spoilers cannot be put on the main page until one month after their united states release because the one for june 4th is from conviction but does not have spoilers also people should be able to nominate quotes but if they get plus 10 they can go on the queue for after the one month spoiler period. GTQ(Problems?) 12:37, June 4, 2011 (UTC)