Wikipedia talk:Spoiler/old template talk/Archive 3

message: W3C does not approve of using the same "id" tag more than once in a page. To fix this, use "class" instead. (I'd fix it myself, but the page is protected.) For and example of an article this affects, see DNA Resequencer (Stargate), and validation results. Armedblowfish 13:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  W3C Validation failure 

message: I kept receiving an error message, and I checked the history after each instance; all three edits were processed simultaneously at 13:52 (UTC).  I've never had this happen before.  —Lifeisunfair 13:58, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The same thing happened when I sent the above apology, but I waited for it to show up.  I see that the site's status is listed at irc://irc.freenode.net/wikipedia as "Slow, edits may return errors but still go through."  That isn't unusual, but I've never had them accumulate like that in the past.  (All attempts after the first were automatically ignored.)  Is this a MediaWiki 1.5 bug?  —Lifeisunfair 14:06, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sorry about the triple revert. 

message: Spoiler warning:
Plot details follow. 	
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Duis tellus. Donec ante dolor, iaculis nec, gravida ac, cursus in, eros. Mauris vestibulum, felis et egestas ullamcorper, purus nibh vehicula sem, eu egestas ante nisl non justo. Fusce tincidunt, lorem nec dapibus consectetuer, leo orci mollis ipsum, eget suscipit eros purus in ante. Mauris at ipsum vitae est lacinia tincidunt. Maecenas elit orci, gravida ut, molestie non, venenatis vel, lorem. Sed lacinia. Suspendisse potenti. Sed ultricies cursus lectus. In id magna sit amet nibh suscipit euismod. Integer enim. Donec sapien ante, accumsan ut, sodales commodo, auctor quis, lacus. Maecenas a elit lacinia urna posuere sodales. Curabitur pede pede, molestie id, blandit vitae, varius ac, purus.
Going upper left is fine, but the "loud" icon is excessive. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:24, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
:When reading the other comments I figured I would get that remark. I could make its baby brother. I like the exclamation mark, even if tiny, to differentiate between the spoiler and the other text. What really annoys me about the current template is that there are so many lines that when placed under a sub-section title it looks really busy. Thanks for the criticization. --None-of-the-Above 05:45, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Story Line

message: !!! THE ICON is ONLY FOR EXAMPLE !! A new non-windows icon would have to be created !!!
	Spoiler warning:    Plot details follow. 	
	Spoiler warning  	
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Duis tellus. Donec ante dolor, iaculis nec, gravida ac, cursus in, eros. Mauris vestibulum, felis et egestas ullamcorper, purus nibh vehicula sem, eu egestas ante nisl non justo. Sed lacinia. Suspendisse potenti. Sed ultricies cursus lectus. In id magna sit amet nibh suscipit euismod. Forgot to sign ... --None-of-the-Above 12:31, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: My next submission

message: IMHO the "and/or" can be replaced with a simple "or". Natural language "or" is flexible. Nobody will read it and expect it to mean a strict exclusive or. The "and/or" is in this case an ugly and useless kludge.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.112.0.7 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Even better would be a simple "plot details follow." After all, the ending is part of the plot, isn't it? Note: I still oppose the spoiler template (details on my user page), but if we're going to have one it should have the best wording in the least obtrusive way possible. --דוד ♣ D Monack 00:22, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I would be bold and change this, but it's protected. Please change "and/or" to "or".  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.225.67.108 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that you're replying to an old discussion.  The wording was changed in this manner, and then it was changed back.  (There doesn't appear to be a consensus.)  Perhaps we should sidestep the issue by changing the wording to "Plot/ending details follow."  (We should leave the word "ending" intact, because many readers otherwise might assume that the article contains only minor details that don't spoil the ending.)  —David Levy 23:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The word "ending" doesn't need to be in there. The words "spoiler warning" should be sufficient for all but the most distracted reader. I don't understand what's unclear about "Spoiler warning: plot details follow" or, if this is not strong enough, "Spoiler warning: significant plot details follow". In my view, "and/or" has got to go. It is non-standard English. Quoting The Elements of Style: "And/or. A device, or shortcut, that damages a sentence and often leads to confusion or ambiguity." --dm (talk) 04:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of "and/or" 

message: We could let users skip any spoiler by using the following:
Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow. Skip this section
We could then edit the  template to have the #endspoiler bookmark. Clicking "skip this section" will jump the section if readers wish to skip. It will be easier than scrolling and looking for the endspoiler notice, and perhaps accidently reading something from the spoiler.
The formatting may be ugly, and the exact wording could be done better, but that can be changed later. Right now I'd just like to hear your comments on the general idea. Thanks--Krackpipe 13:45, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It won't work if there are multiple spoiler/endspoiler pairs in an article.  I'm not aware of any articles that have more than one endspoiler tag; on the other hand, there are many, many articles with just  (sometimes several of them, in different sections) and no , and the link won't work there, either. —Cryptic (talk) 16:39, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

text: User:Cryptic/spoiler.js. —Cryptic (talk) 05:09, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

text: We could always just make a parameterized spoiler template and end spoiler template.  I've done so and made a test page that works fairly simply with the functionality desired.--Burzum 03:55, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we allow users to click to skip to the end of the spoiler? 

message: There should be a clear Wikipedia policy concerning the time limit for "spoiler warnings". Obviously, things do not stay "fresh" forever: after a certain amount of time, they "spoil" on their own, and it is not possible to "spoil" them further: Luke's dad is Darth Vader; "Rosebud" is a sled; Dil's a dude. Personally, I'd put that time limit at about 30 days, but given that some works are not released simultaneously around the world, a longer period might be advisable. Perhaps as much as a year from the first date of publication.
I have encountered one person on Wikipedia who has opined that "spoiler warnings" are not time-sensitive at all. If that were so, every article devoted to a fictional subject would be plastered with these hysterical "spoiler warnings". I hope we can all agree how absurd that would be. Such nonsense is properly relegated to fan sites and bulletin boards -- it has no place in an encyclopedia. -- BBlackmoor (talk),  2005-12-9 T 08:07 Z
:I agree with you, but I think you are too optimistic in thinking that there can be an agreement on this. I've gotten flack when I remove "spoiler" warnings from operas hundreds of years old. - Nunh-huh 08:31, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Every one reads or views a work for the first time, for someon who has not yet read a work, spolers are still spoilers. On USENET discussion fora (whrw spoiler warnings are common, the "freshness" factor is usaully not applied until a work has been in print for say 5-10 years, and then only on works populer enought that it is reasoanble to assume that almost anyoen in that forum will have read the eork or heard the spoielr info. For more obscurfe works this is even less reasonabel. And since wikipedia has a much less uniform audience, I don't think that any perception of when a work is too old to need spoilker warnings is reasonable or safe. DES (talk) 18:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

text: This should only apply to very famous works which practically everyone has heard about. I have never heard of "rosebud" or "dil". 1 year, let alone 30 days, is too short a period for everyone to have read a book. It is probably okay to reveal basic facts of any book, even without a spoiler warning, if this does not reveal the ending or other important events. Pcu123456789 01:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't agree. There is always some people who may not read/hear the story at all, no matter how famous it is. What's more, it seems no hurt to leave this spoiler note, in case if it helps.--Wai Wai 05:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Time limit

message: For a more visible spoiler warning check out Template:spoiler2.  It looks like this:
--Cyde Weys talkcontribs 20:44, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  If you need a more visible spoiler warning ... 

message: This is in response to Netoholic's revert:
1. We have an entire category of "if" templates, and we've incorporated this type of setup into numerous tags (including  and ).  How is this any different?  —Lifeisunfair 17:31, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 1. Those other templates are also in violation of the WP:AUM guidelines. -- Netoholic @ 17:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

text: If you actually read the technical issues, they don’t relate to using metatemplates but to changing them, a fact the persistant edit warrior Netoholic chooses to ignore in his ill-informed and dangerous crusade, and one that means that the most is necessary may be protecting the logic templates. Given Netoholic’s editing restrictions, which clearly remain necessary, I believe that has changes should be reverted whole. Susvolans ⇔ 16:33, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, not really... you've either misread, misunderstood, or misrepresenting, but Jamesday's comments extend to all meta-template use.  Changing the root template just makes matters much worse because it triggers a massive purge from the cache. -- Netoholic @ 16:53, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Avoid using meta-templates]]

message: I request that this template include "Skip spoilers" as a link to the tag which exists in . Infinity0 talk 16:31, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You may want to look a little further up the page. I think that this link should be there. --Krackpipe 12:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I made a template as such; what pure genius, at Template:Spoil. All you need to type in is , where X is the name of the next section, provided it has one. If not, don't use the template. Anyway...I wish that there was an If template, like there is on Uncyclopedia. If there was one, then you could either
1. Enter in nothing as  because there's no next section, and there wouldn't be a link dangling around
or
2. Enter in something for  and make a link to the enxt section...could someone look into that please? Thanks. Flameviper12 21:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Skip spoilers" link 

message: Please add an interwiki link to the Vietnamese version of this template:
 vi:Tiêu bản:Biết trước nội dung
Thanks.
 – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 08:57, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. —Cryptic (talk) 15:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki link to vi: 

message: I see from the archives that the "and/or" wording has been discussed here before. I agree that the "and/or" wording is jarring and distracting. Whenever I read this spoiler warning, it sounds to my ear like a staccatto, mechanical computer voice blaring at me: WARNING!! PLOT AND/OR ENDING DETAILS FOLLOW. LOOKING FOR ENGLISH LESSONS. NEED TO UNLEARN TELEGRAPHESE. HELP!! :-) OK, end of rant. Carcharoth 19:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New comment on old discusssion 

message: A disagreement has arisen between myself and Chcknwnm on Cheers and the use of spoiler tags that we both believe needs a more general answer. The question is are spoilers assumed to exist under a plot section or should one include spoiler tags around the section(s) of the Plot section that include spoilers? Staxringold 14:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question on fundamental purpose and use

message: Should this thing be subst:ed? - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 16:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there's absolutely no reason to - why did you suggest that? Stevage 08:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: subst

message: I noticed that a CSS class "spoiler" has been added to the  tag that wraps this whole template. I think this is a perfect solution for those users who are avidly opposed to this template because it interferes with reading the article. For those users, they can now edit their User:USERNAME/monobook.css style sheet and add the following, effectively removing the "ugly" "intrusion":
.spoiler{
 display: none;
}
I'm not sure if that was the purpose of not, but I think it's a great solution to a nagging problem.
B.Mearns*, KSC 13:04, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While this saves me the problem of seeing them (and thus ends my crusade to remove them). It has to be realized that visitors to Wikipedia will not know or desire to change their monobook and still find the template horrifically ugly and unneccesary. Chuck(척뉴넘) 05:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CSS class good solution to complaints 

message: For reasons behind this change, see this and this. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 12:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Change 

message: There is a discussion on the nature of the guidance relating to this template at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler warning.  Views welcome. Hiding Talk 22:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on the guideline 

message: What do you guys think about a JS solution to the spoiler templates? The problem: when you have a spoiler template it 
:calls attention to itself.
 Could we set up a JS to actually hide the text, as I have seen in game forums? Something like: Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details hidden. Click here to show them. And when you click on "Click here", it would expand to: Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details shown below. Click here to hide them again.
:Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Duis tellus. Donec ante dolor, iaculis nec, gravida ac, cursus in, eros. Mauris vestibulum, felis et egestas ullamcorper, purus nibh vehicula sem, eu egestas ante nisl non justo. Fusce tincidunt, lorem nec dapibus consectetuer, leo orci mollis ipsum, eget suscipit eros purus in ante. Mauris at ipsum vitae est lacinia tincidunt. Maecenas elit orci, gravida ut, molestie non, venenatis vel, lorem. Sed lacinia. Suspendisse potenti. Sed ultricies cursus lectus. In id magna sit amet nibh suscipit euismod. Integer enim. Donec sapien ante, accumsan ut, sodales commodo, auctor quis, lacus. Maecenas a elit lacinia urna posuere sodales. Curabitur pede pede, molestie id, blandit vitae, varius ac, purus.
Opinions?
P.S.: Be aware that as a proponent of Wikia, this change, while possibly too big to be suitable for Wikipedia, may be suitable for smaller wikis. So ignore appliability as a con for the process.
----
This feature is nice to add, as long as the technical side approves too.--Wai Wai 05:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hiding content of the article would be considered censorship, and is not permitted via WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not censored. Placing the spoiler warning template is about the extent that we can do. -- Ned Scott 05:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read the censorship article. And I for one would appreciate it if Cryptics spoiler script automatically hid all spoilers on page load. Shinobu 06:34, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  JS Solution 

message: Please include the world "Substantial" before the word plot. Hipocrite - «Talk» 16:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Proposed 

message: What has been proposed through the length of this talk page has been fully instated. Look at the working sample at Template talk:Spoil. Son of a Peach 17:19, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Working template!

message: ===Wording===
Instead of:
: Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.
Some people may find it annoying due to the word "warning".
How about words like attention/note/reminder:
: Spoiler attention: Plot and/or ending details follow.
: Attention of possible spoiler: Plot and/or ending details follow.
: Spoiler reminder: Plot and/or ending details follow.
: Note on possible spoiler: Plot and/or ending details follow.
Or even remove it, like:
:  Plot and/or ending details follow.
===Image===
It is good to add a nice but not too frightening image. It is easier to catch readers attention. One may miss this spoiler note once in a while.
===Additional functions===
Functions like hiding/showing the spoiler, or skip the spoiler are nice to add too, if it is technically feasible.
:*How about using  for the image? -AMK152 13:40, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler recommendation (summary) 

message: Functions like hiding/showing the spoiler, or skip the spoiler are nice to add too, if it is technically feasible.
:*How about using  for the image? -AMK152 13:40, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional functions

message: In response to the recent RfC, a third talk page has been started for WP:SPOILER to address revisions to the spoiler tag guidelines. You can find the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler warning/guidelines In addition to the use of spoiler tags and notices, the appearance of the templates and sister-spoiler templates may also be discussed. -- Ned Scott 02:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guideline revision talk page 

message: I can't edit this template, could someone add pl:Szablon:Spoiler to it? Appleseed (Talk) 19:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki 

message: Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.
With this warning, no one will ever read the Romeo & Juliet article again and come away with the spoiler that the couple is going to die. Morningmusic 19:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  My proposal 

message: I appoligise in advance that I haven't gone through all the archives to see if this has been discussed before, sorry if it has. Say I go to a page looking for information on a TV show or Anime (etc) that I'm thinking about watching, sometimes there's barely any information above the top section, which is usually called "Story", thus containing plot details, and because of the spoiler warning, I don't read any further. The thing is, I've read these sections on articles for things I've seen, and there can be really big spoilers, but usually there are none at all. This is annoying, because when I go to the page of a show I haven't seen, I don't know whether it's actually safe to read on or not. I suppose this is really about where to draw the line about what's a spoiler, any details at all (e.g. main character's name) are kind of spoilers for someone who knows nothing about the series, but this isn't something people try to avoid being told. I don't really know what a better solution would be, maybe indicating the severity of the spoilers in the warning? This has been nagging me for a while now so I wanted to mention it, feel free to say "problem unsolvable, let's stick with what we've got" and move on if that's how it is. --Aceizace 03:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The basic idea is to give fair warning, but like you've pointed out, it's basically impossible to guarantee if you'll receive the warning at all. You might also check out Wikipedia:Spoiler warning and it's talk page as well. It would seem that this won't be "solvable" in the near future, and probably won't even be a high priority (considering all the other things there are to do for these articles). Probably what should be done is to make it clear that there is a spoiler warning, but the warning itself might not always be there. Maybe noting this in the spoiler warning template itself or just making it more clear on WP:SPOILER. -- Ned Scott 05:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler/Spoiler-free? 

message: zh-classical:Template:Spoiler Yao Ziyuan 09:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Added to Template:Spoiler/doc +mwtoews 06:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add interwiki 

message: A skip feature should be added to this template. skip=yes would enable it, and an optional id parameter could be used to distinguish between different spoiler blocks on a page. It would be coupled with . Here's the code (to be added after the message text):

This would produce:
Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow. [skip]
Then at the top of :

– flamurai (t) 01:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is similar to what I discussed above (and other users as well).  I would hope that we get some comments this time on whether people like this idea or not.  After we get this idea approved or denied then we can talk about the implementation (since there are many different methods going around).  Cheers.--Burzum 02:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I had just thought of a skip feature for spoilers when I came to comment and saw yours.  This could use a push through the system. -- Jmax- 21:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Skip feature 

message: Please add :sv:Mall:Spoiler. /skagedal... 20:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added to Template:Spoiler/doc +mwtoews 06:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swedish interwiki 

message: Please add mk:Шаблон:Разоткривање and don't forget to add the swedish interwiki above :) --B. Jankuloski 03:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added to Template:Spoiler/doc +mwtoews 06:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Macedonian interwiki 

message: A lot of time the white borders chop images in half. Can we remove them or find a way to make them balance next to the image like the horizontal lines?--CyberGhostface 21:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  White borders 

message: Since the spoiler template has style "metadata", it doesn't appear when the article is printed.  Is that intentional?  —Celithemis 08:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe so, but not for certain. -- Ned Scott 09:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't people who want spoiler warnings onscreen want them just as much in print? —Celithemis 13:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the major reasons we have spoiler warnings is not necessarily because of spoilers, but because Wikipedia is a high ranking site for internet searches. It does stand to reason that people who read Wikipedia should expect to come across spoilers in such articles, with or without the tags, but they might not realize this right away. That being said, I bet there's an easy way for logged-in users to edit monobook.css or something that would allow them to show up when printed. -- Ned Scott 15:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure it can be changed with monobook.css, but removing spoiler warnings when an article is printed violates the principle of least surprise.  Few users are going to expect or predict that spoiler warnings will vanish when printing, so why make it the default? —Celithemis 00:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Done. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 04:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler warnings in print 

message: I've started a doc subpage at Template:Spoiler/doc, and it includes the dozens of pending interwiki links. Please edit the source to:
Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.



Thanks! +mwtoews 06:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Luna Santin 07:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Started doc subpage

message: There seems to be some demand for a spoiler template that specifies what of several possibilities the spoiler is for. See  and  and related deletion discussions - I think this could be solved without causing template bloat by adding an optional parameter to the spoiler template. --Random832(tc) 15:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No need. We have ,  and . No need to change anything in . I was so bold as to comment out your editprotected for the time beeing. --GunnarRene 16:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: note that the consensus was to delete  and redirect it here. While I don't think full support for spoiler-season's parameters is necessary, something to provide that functionality would be nice. I wasn't aware of  --Random832(tc) 06:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  for 

message: "Ending" might make a stronger and more intuitively understood keyword to begin this sentence with. It more instantly conveys what exactly we're helping readers-of-a-certain-disposition to avoid.
It also opens up the word plot for potential adjective-addition, such as "Ending and/or key plot details follow". 
(Nobody seems to have suggested it yet, that i can find? I don't know the history of this template though, so possibly it's a terrible idea! 'The devil is in the detail is on demonkey')  --Quiddity 22:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reversal to - "Ending and/or plot details follow." 

message: It is unfair to users who don't want to view spoilers that people who don't like the warnings have the opportunity to hide the tags but they do not have the option to hide spoiler contents with user css. --Random832 05:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the warnings themselves aren't considered article content. -- Ned Scott 06:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove css class 

message: Why not have a "show/hide" between the spoiler and end-spoiler tag (like the table of content)? Then those who do want to see the spoiler-content can show it, those who don't can hide it.
--sin-man 03:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been suggested before, but many people consider it to be a form of censorship. You might find more info on WP:SPOILER. -- Ned Scott 04:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hiding the spoiling content