Talk:Spoiler (media)

message: I am removing the Doctor Who section. It is completely unnecessary and irrelevant to the article. It serves no other purpose than to advertise for the series and was likely put there by some fanboy.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.133.178.225 (talk) 17:21, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Doctor Who

message: I feel like the word "any" is repeated more than strictly necessary in the first sentence of the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:C440:20:1116:419E:815A:19D1:38A8 (talk) 01:55, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much "any" 

message: This should include how everyone spoiled that movie for me...I've never seen it but I know the ending...assholes... Subversive 06:07, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Sixth Sense 

message: Do we really need a load of spoiler warnings all over this article? Honestly, spoilers are what this page is about. When we list spoilers for a collection of games and movies, these spoiler warnings feel pretty redundant, to say the least. It should be pretty d*mn obvious to each and everybody that a page that list spoilers will contain spoilers. /Magore 02:08, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I say we remove them and place an "advanced" spoiler warning, like the one at The Crying Game's wiki article. Calicore 03:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler warnings 

message: I have removed the line about there being different meanings of the word "spoiler" as this article is clearly about the word "spoiler" when used about the media and there is a completely different article for "spoilers" used on cars, found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoiler_%28automotive%29.  --Stenun 07:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aerodynamics 

message: When and where does this word come from? If anyone knows this should probably be included in this article. I was surprised to find that usage goes back to at least 1984. Check out this thread about the movie gremlins from 1984  . Uselesswarrior 16:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The [Etymological Dictionary] gives this:
c.1300, from O.Fr. espoillier "to strip, plunder," from L. spoliare "to strip of clothing, rob," from spolium "armor stripped from an enemy, booty;" originally "skin stripped from a killed animal," from PIE *spol-yo-, perhaps from base *spel- "to split, to break off" (cf. Gk. aspalon "skin, hide," spolas "flayed skin;" Lith. spaliai "shives of flax;" O.C.S. rasplatiti "to cleave, split;" M.L.G. spalden, O.H.G. spaltan "to split;" Skt. sphatayati "splits"). Sense of "to damage so as to render useless" is from 1563; that of "to over-indulge" (a child, etc.) is from 1648 (implied in spoiled). Intransitive sense of "to go bad" is from 1692. To be spoiling for (a fight, etc.) is from 1865, from notion that one will "spoil" if he doesn't get it. The noun meaning "goods captured in time of war" is from c.1300. Spoiler "one who ruins an opponent's chances" is from 1950. Spoil-sport attested from 1801.
Those could possibly be the origin, in that a spoiler strips the user of the enjoyment of the work. Any suggestions? - Redmess 17:57, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of word? 

message: I think this article needs more reliable references. I mean, this is Wikipedia, so we should not cite Wikipedia a source, as wouldn't this be circular reasoning? Though Wikipedia is a good place to start research, I have also heard many times that Wikipedia is not always reliable and should not be used as the only source. --AcademicBrain314159265 04:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is editable by the public, so it is not a reliable source. That fact is implied in the guidelines for wikipedia: It's OK to refer to other wikipedia articles for further reading, but not as a source. Wikipedia is primarily useful as a outline for anyone wanting a starting point on a subject. Baseball Bugs 15:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Especially not since anyone could freely and rightfully edit those articles, making them not so usefull as source. - Redmess 18:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: This seems a bit random "The Doctor Who double part episodes Silence in the Library/Forest of the Dead from the 2008 series made use of the concept of spoilers." might be useful for further expansion and further discusion, but isolated by itself as it is, just seems odd. Jasonfward (talk) 14:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So I came to the talk page to post about this as I have seen/heard it somewhere (but no idea where hence why I'm not editing the main page) claimed that River Song's appearance in Doctor Who seems to approximately coincide with a huge uptick in society's aversion to spoilers, the same source suggesting that it could be the case that it was a contributing factor. To be honest this probably wouldn't make much sense for 2008 as at that stage it was just a character that appeared in one two-parter - albeit a character that is implied to be extremely important to the Doctor in ways that were then unclear - however, since then the "spoilers" thing has been a recurring theme for this character who reappeared several times between 2010 and 2013 (with a one-off final appearance for Christmas 2015) and has been firmly established as, frankly, iconic. So in retrospect I do think inclusion of a small mention of this could be deserved if there is indeed a decent source for it (being totally honest, I can't remember if I read/heard it in an article on a respected website such as the Radio Times or just in some random YouTuber's video, so...) but in 2008 it would certainly have been very out of place. Anditres (talk) 12:05, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random 

message: "The appearance of spoilers on an internet website is not considered a violation of terms and conditions by any ISP."
Seriously? No one in their right mind, would consider this a violation of T&C's 98.28.68.59 (talk) 20:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  On the Internet. 

message: "...but if the posting of "spoiling" information was unavoidable, it be preceded by a warning ("SPOILER!"), or the spoiler itself has to be masked so that it can not be visible to any but those keen for details and not fazed at the thought of such potentially plot-revealing information."
But its being done everywhere on Wikipedia without a care in the world. Shouldn't it apply here as well? Shouldn't relevant sections carry a spoiler alert? IMDB does so responsibly. 
Johnnoelbose (talk) 13:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Spoilers 

message: What is the proper etiquette to not spoiling the endings to pornographic films such as the ones found on brazzers.com or Two Girls One Cup? Don't most films end in a cumjizzshot to the face? Is this generally assumed or are spoiler alerts still needed? Calicore 02:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia guidelines call for not removing info simply because it is a spoiler or adding a disclaimer. I don't see any reason why porn should be any different.--64.229.167.20 (talk) 21:51, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hardcore Pornography Spoilers 

message: Dunno where the results of this experimental study were published, but it may be useful in the article. Basically says plot may be overrated, spoilers don't ruin a story, and knowing the ending of a story can make the experience more enjoyable. --82.170.113.123 (talk) 21:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research 

message: The first section currently begins: "The term spoiler was introduced in the early days of the internet, on the internet, and is often associated with specialist internet sites". That is truly horrible wording and I've got no idea what the "on the internet" clause is supposed to mean nor what "specialist internet sites" are. Thryduulf (talk) 12:47, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many internets 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Spoiler (media). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160203105208/http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/tv/2009/01/how-soon-is-too-soon-for-spoilers.html to http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/tv/2009/01/how-soon-is-too-soon-for-spoilers.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:32, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Fhrteieu 178.134.226.88 (talk) 07:17, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mari 

message: — Assignment last updated by Iamclandestined (talk) 04:25, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Mass Media and Society