Wikipedia talk:Professional wrestling spoilers
Proposal[change source]
I suggest this be an official Wikipedia guideline. I have proposed this for not only the reasons in the guideline but also cause a guideline has more pull than a word of a non-admin. chris†ianrocker90 13:56, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- Not even remotely something that an encyclopedia should be trying to codify with a guideline. It would be fine as an essay. But only things that affect more than a very very very small subset of articles should be guidelines. Also if Reliable Sources have printed something that happened then it is completely valid to add to an article. And if something changes in the editing or whatever that can be mentioned as well. -DJSasso (talk) 14:31, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- The point though, Dj, is that if it changes in editing then it no longer has any bearing on storyline and is thus no longer relevant. This is not a movie where if it changes it's notable, this is pro wrestling where last minutes changes happen daily, most of the time caused by these same spoilers that are to be outlawed by this proposed guideline. If I worked at it I could probably fill 10 pages with useless storyline changes that happened at the last minute. chris†ianrocker90 15:14, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- These spoilers are different in that the spoilers themselves have the potential to change (if I am understanding the guideline correctly), while spoilers in the conventional sense are just that - facts. To put it another way, the spoilers in the context of this guideline are more speculation than fact (and we haven't talked about reliability, credibility and the issue of original research), thus the reason that they should not be included in articles. Of course, if there was a WikiProject on this I would have preferred this guideline being moved to a subpage, instead of existing in the Project namespace's root. Chenzw Talk 15:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- Honestly I tried starting a Pro wrestling project but I was the only member so it doesn't do any good. chris†ianrocker90 15:31, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- Like I said, I have no problem with it being an essay. Which you can outline all of those facts you mention. But I just don't feel it belongs as an actual official guideline. If this were en I would suggest like Chenzw as a wiki-project level guideline. Since we don't really have wikiprojects here for the most part I would say an essay would be a good thing because it is something written down that you can show users if you feel you need to. But I still can't imagine that we have enough traffic on wrestling articles of people putting spoilers on them ahead of time. Not to the point where it can't easily be reverted or corrected once the event has happened. -DJSasso (talk) 16:16, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- These spoilers are different in that the spoilers themselves have the potential to change (if I am understanding the guideline correctly), while spoilers in the conventional sense are just that - facts. To put it another way, the spoilers in the context of this guideline are more speculation than fact (and we haven't talked about reliability, credibility and the issue of original research), thus the reason that they should not be included in articles. Of course, if there was a WikiProject on this I would have preferred this guideline being moved to a subpage, instead of existing in the Project namespace's root. Chenzw Talk 15:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- The point though, Dj, is that if it changes in editing then it no longer has any bearing on storyline and is thus no longer relevant. This is not a movie where if it changes it's notable, this is pro wrestling where last minutes changes happen daily, most of the time caused by these same spoilers that are to be outlawed by this proposed guideline. If I worked at it I could probably fill 10 pages with useless storyline changes that happened at the last minute. chris†ianrocker90 15:14, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't see how this is a big enough deal to warrant being a guideline. If there's a serious problem with people using spoilers in wrestling articles, then that's a separate matter, but this just doesn't look like it needs to be a guideline at this point. /fC 22:24, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- This is meant to be preventive, not reactive. chris†ianrocker90 01:06, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
- Which is the problem, guidelines are supposed to be descriptive not prescriptive. In other words they are supposed to describe what happens, not tell you how to do something. In other words you shouldn't create a guideline to try and make people handle something a certain way, a guideline is supposed to describe how things actually are handled. And since this seems like a minor issue, there isn't enough of a history to actually do that. -DJSasso (talk) 16:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
- I don't buy that. Guidelines are meant to help the wiki. How is this hurting to wiki being preventive? chris†ianrocker90 18:42, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
- Which is the problem, guidelines are supposed to be descriptive not prescriptive. In other words they are supposed to describe what happens, not tell you how to do something. In other words you shouldn't create a guideline to try and make people handle something a certain way, a guideline is supposed to describe how things actually are handled. And since this seems like a minor issue, there isn't enough of a history to actually do that. -DJSasso (talk) 16:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Proposal withdrawn I have marked it an essay for the time being. chris†ianrocker90 17:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC)