Violations of the Spoiler Policy

Even if these quick fixes are done, some main characters will be left with all spoilers unmarked while the protagonist and other minor characters have them marked. So it needs more work in many entries.

Moving conversation from Complete Monster cleanup.

(The quote in question is a spoiler for Red vs. Blue: The Chorus Trilogy)

(quoted post edited to redact spoilers)

Regarding the trope page, my thoughts are that unless the spoiler is openly shown in marketing/cover art such that a non-fan might casually come across it (e.g. a villain who underwent a Heel–Face Turn is shown standing with the heroes' team wearing their uniform), this line of reasoning is Fan Myopic — a trope page is not written with any expectation of the readers being followers of a particular work.

As for removing spoiler tags on the work page, that's more a proposition for the discussion pages of the work page(s). Having it spoiler tagged there is consistent with how the rest of the YMMV page is handled, so proposing un-spoilering it is a change in the matter of "how do we handle spoiler tags on this work page in general?".

Monster.Web Animation is a subpage of a Spoilered Rotten-tagged page, not having spoilers make sense there.

YMMV.Red Vs Blue The Chorus Trilogy is a subpage of a work page. Unless the reasoning mentioned or the page getting spoilers-off, the sensitive information should not be visible, which was also confirmed for me here.

If we want to use that standard of what a non-fan could easily come across, I got curious and googled "red vs blue chorus trilogy" - the first three images that come up are Locus and Felix standing next to each other looking chummy, and if you look up Felix by himself, you get his wiki page (where the preview text spoils that he pulls a Face–Heel Turn), the first two video responses openly discuss his status as a villain, and the second result on the searches goes to the Villains Wiki. I can concede that maybe the details are spoiler worthy, but I genuinely think that Felix's mere existence as a villain is, in itself, no longer a spoiler at this point. By that logic, I think the quote on the trope page is kosher, but maybe that's just me.

Edit: Purely just out of curiosity, I also googled "red vs blue villains" - Felix's picture was attached to the second web result, and the first "people also ask", "who is the villain in Red vs. Blue", is a video all about him as a villain.

Edited by STARCRUSHER99 on Apr 28th 2024 at 7:21:24 AM

Spoilers Off on trope pages doesn't apply to things above the example line:

Edited by Twiddler on Apr 28th 2024 at 4:22:47 AM

I know - my argument is that the character has become enough of a popular villain that the quote itself no longer becomes a spoiler.

Edit: was edited to reflect that it wasn't directed to me

I'm specifically only making this argument with respect to the quote and not the other pages (hence "I can concede that maybe the details are spoiler worthy")

Edited by STARCRUSHER99 on Apr 28th 2024 at 7:28:39 AM

Honestly, I respectfully disagree with Star. Regardless of whether spoilers on the page itself are removed or not, Felix is ​​a spoiler villain. And period. Removing spoilers won't change anything. I'm sure there are other good quotes that could replace Felix's.

The Villains Wiki, unfortunately, almost always appears when recruiting a villain. It doesn't matter how famous or unknown the villain is. And frankly, the details that Star gives do not convince me that spoilers from his post and his boss should be removed. Felix is ​​a spoiler villain, and given that the arcs are mostly self-contained, those who are familiar with Red and Blue, but not familiar with the Chorus arc, may spoil important moments for themselves.

Personally, I'm not against his quote remaining with his name, but I am firmly against removing spoilers from his entry. Even if we agree that he is very famous as a villain, he still contains a lot of spoiler details (his role in the war, motives, connection with Locus and Hagrove, etc.).

Edited by Ghal-Sur on Apr 28th 2024 at 4:27:03 AM

To me "everyone knows" is not an exception to Administrivia.Spoilers Off ever.

re: Twiddler noted, then if a page image is a spoiler, it'd need to go, though the policy page isn't very clear on quotes specifically.

Edited by Amonimus on Apr 28th 2024 at 2:30:14 PM

That's not what I'm arguing, though. The standard that was proposed was "the spoiler is openly shown in marketing/cover art such that a non-fan might casually come across it", so I gave examples of things that non-fans would easily come across, especially very vague searches to the show itself and including some tools used in official marketing (like the pic of Locus and Felix standing next to each other for season 13), hence the mere fact that he's speaking a CM quote (which is otherwise pretty vague, in my opinion as a fan of the show) isn't a spoiler. Again, I'll concede touching the YMMV at all, my only thing is the quote that is currently being considered to be cut.

Maybe it should be rephrased as "the spoiler is openly shown in marketing/cover art", which is more accurate to what Late-Arrival Spoiler is.

Tbh I'm seeing Star's point here, the character being a villain is barely a spoiler anymore and is commonly known as such, I don't think we need to dance around the spoilers anymore when the show has long passed the arc, the character is a villain longer than he is a "hero", and Star supplied several instances of how much of a non-spoiler it's treated as across the web. Like, even the roosterteeth website page for the Chorus Trilogy's backdrop is Felix and Locus standing side by side as allies.

Saying the quote should be kept, myself.

Edited by Ravok on Apr 28th 2024 at 4:55:24 AM

I’m gonna need to see if there are any other good quotes to replace it with before I decide anything

On a semi related note, is there an It Was His Sled thread?

The reasoning it gives for images is "as it's above the example line and the first thing most readers see", which is also true of page top quotes.

Regarding this cover art for the Chorus Trilogy featuring those two characters standing together: from the start they're set up as two major characters and their relationship as a significant one — as foils, rivals, and ex-comrades. It's only the true nature of the relationship that's hidden. So I don't think that image necessarily communicates anything other than that initial impression. Even if you do get a "getting along" impression from it, for all you know, it's from a flashback.

Maybe an Adam Tyrus quote will do? And no, there doesn’t seem to be any cleanup for this trope.

Maybe Felix could have been called differently? For example, just a mercenary? Here on the monsters page for Ace Attorney there is a quote from a spoiler villain, but there the villain was named differently and therefore there is no spoiler.

I actually like that idea really well, we could keep the quote and remove all mentions of his name and replace it with something else.

Characters.Cat Dog has a "Spoiler Characters" folder. I think it would be fine to rename it to "CatDog's parents".

Er, yeah. I can imagine why it may be a spoiler to some, but the mere fact that they exist isn't a spoiler in and of itself.

Just to check -

I am not aware of any agreement that we handle Tabletop RPG spoilers any differently to spoilers for video games and other playable works. And there's nothing in Administrivia suggesting that we should.

So setting and plot details for an official Dungeons & Dragons adventure would be handled exactly the same way as, say, setting and plot details for a Skyrim DLC. Both can be added to the work page and subpages, both should consider tagging to avoid spoilers.

Yes, GMs who buy $180 worth of epic tabletop game campaign may be unhappy if players read the twists on TVT (or simply google them, check another wiki or buy/pirate their own copy...) — it's a very different dynamic to spoiling a single-player game — but I don't see that as a reason to remove them from work pages rather than spoiler tagging them.

Fair?

(Prompted by offsite queries, not anything said on the forums)

Edited by Mrph1 on May 6th 2024 at 2:09:53 PM

On technical level, I don't think there's much difference between a tabletop set and a book with multiple stories. Unless it's significant to the narrative, like a reveal about an antagonist, it wouldn't be a spoiler. Also we generally don't really care what authors or other people want with pages, Moustrap is the only exception.

Edited by Amonimus on May 6th 2024 at 4:19:50 PM

Prismo's folder in Characters.Adventure Time Other Characters has a spoiler mark above the example list. Should we unmark all the spoilers on Prismo's folder or just remove the spoiler marked paragraphs?

These are very specific, so removing them and converting to examples if possible should be fine.

Paper Mario 64 has some inconsistencies with spoilers. A few things (mostly about skipping optional mini-bosses) are spoiler-tagged in one example and then unmarked in any other mention of them on the page.

Any objection to cutting the first paragraph of the Sports Tropes introduction?

It seems easier than trying to rewrite it, and not sure it adds much.

Funeral Home has bad issues with spoilers. Not only does the page have spoilers above the example line, but they also hide what works are being spoiled, with the YMMV page also doing this on the Poor Man's Substitute entry

Just made Film.Exiled A Law And Order Movie by moving over examples from a recap page. Not familiar with the work, so any help with spoiler tagging would be appreciated; I added tags based on the examples and what is described by the Wikipedia summary as happening toward the end of the movie.