Anime, Hentai, Manga, Bishoujo Games, Live Action Films, Music, Art, and Erotic Doujinshi Discussion Forum

It is currently December 14th, 2017, 2:03 pm


All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: What's up with wikipedia? - a.k.a. Spoilerland
PostPosted: June 4th, 2007, 1:40 am 
Offline
Regular
User avatar

Joined: May 15th, 2007, 2:23 pm
Posts: 430
Location: Brazil
A friend of mine told me that I should at all costs avoid as hell to look at anime articles at wikipedia because they are biased and hugelly spoilish ...

... well, that was an invitation right? :roll:

And indeed, gee, what's up with that? most of wikipedia articles are so much clogged with spoilers that it's almost impossible to read them. They simply add a "Spoiler starts here" ... "Spoilers end here" as if were no tomorrow. Ok they warn you, but can you read something like this without being spoiled? (simulation):

Quote:
The title is about a girl and his dog

SPOILERS START HERE

the girl dies in the end

SPOILERS END HERE

Main characters are:

Name 1: cute girl that have a dog

SPOILERS START HERE

Who eventually dies tragically killed by best friend

SPOILERS END HERE

Name 2: cute girls's best friend and love of her life

SPOILERS START HERE

Who in rage kills Name 1 in a rage attack at the last episode

SPOILERS END HERE

yadda

SPOILERS START HERRE

Secondary characters mysteries are A B C

SPOILERS END HERE


Ok, you got the picture it's impossible to read it even skipping the spoiler warnings, but that's actually beyond my point, my point is: should reviews, or incidentally encyclopedic articles, feature spoilers? What's the actual point of spoiling the title all over the place anyway? reviews are meant for those who did not watch the title so even if hidden/separated/whatever, spoilers are way off, and encyclopedia content whould never damage or spoil anything it is talking about, specially because theoretically the driving sales point of a plot-driven content (be it a book, series, movie or in this case anime) is exactly it's mysteries and alas spoilers, so spoiling the title than again goes not only against encyclopedic practice, but one could even raise copyright issues (reducing something's value by spoiling is certainly a copyright infringment). Who would watch a mystery thriller if you accidentaly read the culprit/mysteries solutions beforehand? half (or more) the fun is lost.

I think that spoilers are just stupid, regardless if the meaning is encyclopedia articles or reviews. Spoilers are probably only acceptable at essays or discussion foruns, and obviously, widelly warned beforehand, not like "Cute girl dies in the end (BTW, beware spoilers from this point on)" ><;

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 4th, 2007, 2:59 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: March 15th, 2007, 11:57 pm
Posts: 755
Well when you are looking for reviews and stuff.... theres simply alot of better resources than wikipedia. So I say lets not care about what exactly is in there....

Wikipedia anime articles tend to be an entire summary of the whole show anyway with additional tidbit information.

_________________
Image
http://depleted.wordpress.com/
The contents of a deranged mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 4th, 2007, 3:07 am 
Offline
Major Contributor
User avatar

Joined: April 26th, 2007, 7:33 pm
Posts: 1210
Location: Austin, Texas
Well the articles do warn about spoilers, so I guess read more carefully next time?

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 4th, 2007, 4:39 am 
Offline
Regular

Joined: March 26th, 2007, 4:09 am
Posts: 556
Location: The Bastion of Imagination
Well, I'm kinda divided on the issue. On the one hand, I think that Wikipedia, as an encyclopaedic article, should contain ALL pertinent information on the subject matter, including spoilers and spoiler-like material. However, I also believe that potential spoiler material should be more restricted than normal information. This is largely an issue of the article's style and format, however; some wikipedia sub-sites have extremely strict guidelines on the posting of spoiler material, while others are much more relaxed about the issue.

In general, always visit wikipedia sites at your own risk. If you are not willing to spoil yourself, I suggest staying away from wikipedia. (Good thing for me I don't particularly mind being spoiled. :P)

_________________
In the end, all we have are the stories we can tell. And, if we are fortunate, somebody who will listen. - sylara{Z}


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 4th, 2007, 8:41 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: March 16th, 2007, 8:22 am
Posts: 795
Location: The Home of Terminally Stupid
I can understand why people don't necarssily like the spoilers wikipedia has, but no ones saying you have to go there and read then entries. I still love the still, for most series it being spoiled doesn't ruin my enjoyment of it and more importantly I usually can't wait over half a year to find out how things turn out. What can I say I'm in patient.

_________________
I'm back, and my spelling is actually worse then before. Though my grammar is better. You have been warned.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 4th, 2007, 1:28 pm 
Offline
Resident Scholar
User avatar

Joined: May 13th, 2007, 7:57 am
Posts: 4121
Location: Trier, Germany
Yeah, as already mentioned it should be a question of format.
If we can hide spoiler contents in the forum, why should it be impossible on Wikipedia?
Easy answer: Because any idiot can write articles and intelligently editing an article, including preassumed assessment of the information at hand, is just not any idiot's business. 8)
Which is to say, and if I have understood the Wikipedia principle correctly:
If you don't like an article - then change it and help others come back alive and unspoiled. :lol:

_________________
42317
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 4th, 2007, 3:26 pm 
Offline
Regular
User avatar

Joined: May 15th, 2007, 2:23 pm
Posts: 430
Location: Brazil
Quote:
Well the articles do warn about spoilers, so I guess read more carefully next time?


lol, did you read my simulation? can you read that WITHOUT passing your eyes accidentaly over an spoiler? that's actually how several articles look like.

Sure I know any idiot (most likelly all are >.>) can write at wikipedia (and worst, there is no moderation, and the people who keep an artice 'safe' is often the original idiots who wrote it xD), I know I can just skip wikipedia and forget it exists when I want to read about series I did not watch, that was not my point, I was asking why people think it's a rightfull choice to add spoilers inside a review or encyclopedia content.

It seams some people in this very thread did not read about encyclopedia not being something that should reduce or "spoil" something it talks about =p

Quote:
If you don't like an article - then change it and help others come back alive and unspoiled.


I think even non-registered users can change, but wanna make a bet? If I edit something and remove the spoilers, I think it will be reverted in less than 24h, because I'm sure Im not the only one who thought about removing spoilers and leaving an article more into "information/review" mode and got banged down by the idiots who think that an Enciclopedia is about spoilers xD

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 4th, 2007, 8:18 pm 
Offline
Regular

Joined: March 26th, 2007, 4:09 am
Posts: 556
Location: The Bastion of Imagination
Just curious. Why do you believe that encyclopedic articles should NOT contain spoilers or spoiler-like information? Aren't encyclopedias meant to be repositories of all relevant information pertaining to the subject? I frequently use wikipedia to look up old and almost forgotten books, movies and games, for example. These same articles frequently contain a synopsis (some brief, others highly detailed) of the book/movie/game's entire plot. Now, the chances of me getting my hands on the original material is extremely low due to them being out of print (not to mention I really wouldn't have the time to go and read/watch/play the item in question myself anyway). To this end, I'm glad that these articles contain complete spoilers, because they allow me to understand the subject matter without having to spend time doing it myself. (And really, isn't that what stored information is all about? Passing knowledge and experience to somebody else without them having to do it themselves?)

_________________
In the end, all we have are the stories we can tell. And, if we are fortunate, somebody who will listen. - sylara{Z}


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 4th, 2007, 11:48 pm 
Offline
Regular
User avatar

Joined: May 15th, 2007, 2:23 pm
Posts: 430
Location: Brazil
Because Encyclopedias as per definition cannot break copyright rules nor damage the value of anything they follow. Even Wikipedia have strong copyright protection rules, for instance, it's strictly forbidden (though you find some since it's poorly moderated) to add any image of an anime in any article, it's also forbidden to mention any data that would break copyright.

Spoiling a plot-driven work is pretty much the same.

And even if it was not the case, one should always be carefull when writing any article on a subject that can be ruined by any "spoilish" data, regardless of it being encyclopedic or not, since I believe (and it seams I'm the minority) that spoilers should be separated and very well warned to prevent accidental reading (i.e. ruining). Like, a hidden DIV spoiler system like some foruns would be way better than the lame "spoilers start here" tag system.

Quote:
To this end, I'm glad that these articles contain complete spoilers, because they allow me to understand the subject matter without having to spend time doing it myself. (And really, isn't that what stored information is all about? Passing knowledge and experience to somebody else without them having to do it themselves?)


A plot is not knowledge, it's fiction. Also, an enciclopedia is not the place to put game walkthru, or spoil the ending. You say you are glad they feature it so you don't have to spend time doing yourself, but that is quite incorrect: how did you find out about the book/movie for starters? also, understanding a plot is also not encicplopedic because it's based on speculation (like, can you explain Lain to me without making some speculation? spoilers are one thing, speculation to explain something is another subject).

IMHO it's just people getting lazy to think and searching an enciclopedia for the wrong reasons. I would never read an essay or spoiler just to "understand something without doing it myself" ... the whole point of a thought-provoking plot is to ... make you think :? It's the same as saying that Animetric reviews are "too big" and ask the reviewers to make shorter versions because its too bothersome to read all that (and I do see people asking that a lot of time in several sites, people just don't want to read/think).

I will always be against that. If you don't want to think or take your time reading (or watching the anime and reaching your own conclusions) than better not even do it, just watch Naruto or something mindless like that :?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 5th, 2007, 2:27 am 
Offline
Lurker
User avatar

Joined: April 14th, 2007, 11:35 pm
Posts: 71
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Caiobrz wrote:
Quote:
Well the articles do warn about spoilers, so I guess read more carefully next time?


lol, did you read my simulation? can you read that WITHOUT passing your eyes accidentaly over an spoiler? that's actually how several articles look like.


Can you provide links to said articles? I just find it surprising that something so poorly written as to be on par with the example you provided wouldn't have been changed almost immediately considering how zealous some Wikipedia users are with constantly checking changed content... not that it's a bad thing. Although it kind of confuses me as to why you think Wikipedia has poor moderation given this. Whenever I have seen people mess with articles or add poorly written information to pages, it has always been corrected within a few minutes.

_________________
There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 5th, 2007, 4:35 am 
Offline
Regular

Joined: March 26th, 2007, 4:09 am
Posts: 556
Location: The Bastion of Imagination
Caiobrz: I do agree with you on one point. Reviews should NEVER contain spoilers. After all, reviews are meant to be aids to help one decide whether or not to watch/read/play a particular media item. If a review contained spoilers, it would certainly ruin a lot of the enjoyment for the reader, because now their experience of the item has been compromised.

But I do not hold encyclopaedic articles to be the same as reviews. As I mentioned in my first post, I believe that encyclopaedias and similar articles should contain ALL information about the subject matter, even spoilers. They are meant to be information repositories, not aids in consumer choice. Why would you use an encyclopaedia to decide on whether or not you want to watch a movie anyway? Wouldn't a review serve that purpose much better? :?

As to the second part of your post, you mistake my intentions in reading spoiler materials on wikipedia and similar sites. I would not have watched/played/read the item in question ANYWAY, in any scenario. I just do not have the time to do it. However, I DO want to know at least what others are talking about when they discuss such topics, and so I go to learn what I can about the subject material. I don't believe it would be better for me to remain ignorant about it. I may not have first-hand knowledge of the subject matter, but at least I have SOME knowledge.

_________________
In the end, all we have are the stories we can tell. And, if we are fortunate, somebody who will listen. - sylara{Z}


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 7th, 2007, 4:17 pm 
Offline
Regular
User avatar

Joined: May 15th, 2007, 2:23 pm
Posts: 430
Location: Brazil
@rurounijf: Seriously, 90% of their articles are that way. I picked 4 titles now and 3 had them (the only one safe was Venus Versus Virus, I guess it's too new for people to add spoilers though I have an essay at my site):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solty_Rei

(don't even have spoiler warnings, be carefull)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_In ... characters

(pathetic on/off each character)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utawareru_Mono

(whole page is a spoiler, at least they did put a warning)

@Zaxares: I see, well, anyway I don't agree encyclopaedias should also have spoilers, they are a source of reference and knowledge, not spoilers. Go take a look at an movie article at Brittania, you won't find a single spoiler.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: June 7th, 2007, 8:00 pm 
Offline
Regular

Joined: March 26th, 2007, 4:09 am
Posts: 556
Location: The Bastion of Imagination
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree then. :wink: I find the distinction between spoilers not being part of the knowledge base to be overly fine, but that's just my personal opinion.

_________________
In the end, all we have are the stories we can tell. And, if we are fortunate, somebody who will listen. - sylara{Z}


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group