Contents 1 Above/Below Relevant Headers 2 Spoiler Start/Close the best solution? 3 WTF? (aka What the French?) 4 Move 5 Rules about spoilers in talk pages?

Above/Below Relevant Headers Edit

I've been putting ME2 Spoiler Warnings under the Mass Effect 2 header, simply because I feel it more accurately shows where the spoilers actually are, and also because I think it looks better. There wasn't any protest to this until on the Tali page the spoiler warning was moved to above the Mass Effect 2 header.

I'm curious as to what the reasoning behind this is. It looks out of place, as if there's supposed to be more text underneath it relevant to the header which it is under. My first thought was that having the Mass Effect 2 header before the spoiler would be spoiling something by giving away the fact that the subject of the article is involved in ME2 in some way, but that's just stupid, since the spoiler warning itself does the same thing.

The problems I see with the way it is used on the Tali page are: -It looks like the spoiler is related to 'Missions and Assignments' -It gives the false impression that the trivia section contains spoilers. -It looks weird

There are two possible solutions. 1. Do what I've been doing it and put it directly under the header. 2. Redesign it so that there is some better indication of where the spoilers begin, and where they end, some kind of horizontal line extending the entire width of the page.

I vote for 1. :D

JakePT 04:50, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

I generally put it above headings for neatness' sake, so there isn't a large gap under the ME2 heading with just the spoiler tag in it. --Tullis 13:38, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

Hm, I think it looks neater underneath. I guess it looks like we have quite differing tastes on this sort of thing, but you're the boss. :D

JakePT 04:14, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm also gonna have to vote in favor of putting the spoiler tag above the heading. SpartHawg948 09:19, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

I also like having the tags above the headings. This allows me to close my browser as soon as possible, before my eyes can auto-read the spoilers :'(. Though I think we need a better quote for the ME2 spoiler tag since we have some actual footage of the game now. I suggest:

- "...but you're dead."

- "We do not experience fear, but we know how it affects you."

- "The chances of surviving are slim."

Anything but what we have now :D

--Paper Street 14:08, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Did the best with what I had at the time, yo. : ) I try to make our spoiler quotes little references to knowing too much, so maybe the one about experiencing fear might work nicely. : ) --Tullis 14:35, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Meh, it's too long. ...And also, I can't use the "you're dead" quote. Putting a spoiler in a spoiler warning is getting into some deep philosophical territory. : ) It'll have to be the third one, until we play the game and get a better one. --Tullis 14:45, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Current system isn't working so well for the Garrus page at certain page widths. Also, still not buying logic for putting it above the heading, at least without a different design that better indicates 'down'.

Is there no code/system where we can have a spoiler warning that can be clicked to expose the spoiling information with some kind of border around it to show what information is a spoiler. I'm envisioning something like the current banner but that extends the full width of the page but with a little down arrow at the right edge that when clicked extends the purple border down and exposes the ME2 information inside it.

Haven't seen anything like this before on other wikis so it's probably not possible, I'm just brainstorming.

I'm also already expecting 'what we have is "good enough"' responses, but I still think I should push for the best possible solutions/layouts. A lot of things on some pages, like some spoiler warning placements, really look slapdash, with odd spacing in particular. JakePT 05:39, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Well, I for one tend to skim ahead several lines, and it's nice to have the spoiler warning above the header, as it pretty much ensures I don't see something I don't want to, as opposed to having it below. As for "not buying logic"... I don't see what you were referring to w/ the Tali page... you say it looked the spoilers were related to the missions and assignments section. I mean, why would the spoiler warning be related in any way to the section above the spoiler tag? That's what I'm "not buying"! :P As for needing a better system that indicates "down" referring to where the spoilers are in relation to the tag, what better way is there than saying "spoilers for --- follow"? Pretty well sums it up. Should we say spoilers follow and then have big neon arrows pointing to the following text? As for the "what we have is good enough" response, I totally agree! This is the first time I've seem placement of spoiler tags become an issue, which reminds me of an old saw, "if it's not broke, don't fix it". SpartHawg948 05:50, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Spoiler Start/Close the best solution? Edit

I find the current system—a single "spoilers follow" tag—inconsistently placed and confusing. I believe we need a "Spoilers Start here" tag and a "Spoilers End here" tag. Perhaps just one universal "spoilers end here" so we don't have to make one for each source. I believe that the placement of these tags should be within each individual section. For example:

• Section Heading
• Summary/intro
• Non-spoiler content
• <Spoiler-Start>
• Spoiler content
• <Spoiler-End>
• Non-spoiler content
• etc

I feel this solution would work best for identifying sections with spoilers. fodigg ^(talk) | 17:07, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

The Dragon Age wiki here on Wikia has a great spoiler-hiding system that perhaps could be imported over to the Mass Effect wiki. It would solve this problem, as it literally hides spoilier information. (For example, http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Morrigan#Involvement.) RobertM525 09:15, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, the spoiler tags above or below the headings bit was discussed at some length in the above section, the general consensus being that above the heading works best. As for a "spoilers end here" tag, while I'm not opposed to the concept, are there really any articles that need it? Generally, the only section following a "spoiler section" will be the Trivia section, and the trivia sections themselves often times contain spoiler-type info. Again though, if there are articles needing it, I'm not opposed, I'd just prefer not to see a plethora of articles with "spoilers end here" tags jammed in between the end of the article and the categories.

As for the Dragon Age info, they do have a fairly nice system. Any idea how it's done? B/c, while I certainly admire it, I have no idea how they do it. I am a very small-time contributor to that fine wiki. SpartHawg948 09:34, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

I only watched the implementation in the article itself, but the tag looks very simple: {{spoiler|shown content|hidden content}}. When clicking on the the text of the when clicking on the spoiler heading, the browser toggles between "shown content" and "hidden content". I think I suggested something similar before, I think it was on Tullis talk page.

I think we could implement it on every article that contain spoilers for both ME and ME2, and let visitors decide what content they want to hide (if any). --silverstrike 15:20, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

Having a different spoiler-hider for ME1, ME2, and ME3 (eventually) would be fantastic. If such a thing were possible, it would rock. As for how they do it on the DA:O Wiki... you've got me. The tag looks "proprietary." But maybe the only part that is is the graphic/quote it loads. RobertM525 05:52, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

So I take it the DAO-style spoiler-hider has been deemed unworkable? RobertM525 05:57, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

Workable, but not desirable. --silverstrike 07:51, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm missing something, but what could possibly be undesirable about that setup? What could be better for a spoiler-hider than something which literally hides the spoiler part of an article? Personally, I think it's pure genius and can't think of any reason not to use it except for an inability to do so. (From a technical or temporal standpoint. ;) ) RobertM525 07:26, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

WTF? (aka What the French?)Edit

So, what happened to the general spoiler warning? You know, the one that just said "spoilers follow" without saying spoilers for what? I went to put in a general tag for a Mass Effect: Redemption spoiler, but when I used the tag that used to be the general spoiler tag, it was for Mass Effect. And it appears that all the general tags that were used to denote spoilers for Mass Effect Galaxy are also now ME spoiler tags. SpartHawg948 04:31, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Move Edit

Since this page is akin to a community guideline, it should be in the Mass Effect Wiki space. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:15, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Bastian964 05:13, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. SpartHawg948 08:13, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Time's up. I will carry out the move. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:59, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Rules about spoilers in talk pages? Edit

After searching through the community guidelines and the manual of style, I found several rules pertaining to spoilers in main articles, but I was wondering what the policy was for spoilers in talk pages. For example, I was wanting to ask a question in the "N7" talk page which involved one of the [early-game] plot developments in Mass Effect 2 involving the Systems Alliance, but I wasn't sure what the ruling was -- "free rein," "add a spoiler template," or "don't discuss at all." Thanks for the clarification. -- Dracosummoner 20:50, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

There is no policy on talk pages, and I would say that we shouldn't have one. They are there to improve the articles, so it's read at your own risk. Lancer1289 20:54, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much, that was very helpful and informative. So I guess that if I wanted to ask a "Why is the 'N7' label used here" question (referring to something in the game itself, not something on the Wikia), that sort of question would be more appropriate for an actual Mass Effect forum, since the article itself doesn't need any improvement that I'm aware of? -- Dracosummoner 22:19, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Right on, that question would go in a forum post. -- Commdor (Talk) 22:21, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Maybe it would be a good idea to add a generic spoiler warning to the top of all talk pages, to protect those who don't realise that it's "read at your own risk" as Lancer put it. A lot of users clearly miss the point of talk pages anyway and use them as forums for discussing the topic not the article it's self. As so many people seem to miss the point (although in a different way), I bet there are a reasonable number who go onto talk pages not expecting to encounter spoilers. Might be nice to give them a heads up. Phalanx-a-pedian 20:55, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

And how about no. Doing that will resulting in every talk page having the spoiler warning. Classification: unnecessary, needless, repetitive, annoying, and completely useless. Talk pages are read at your risk, as they are everywhere else. Do not want spoilers, do not read talk pages. Lancer1289 21:01, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

The point was that they would be at the top of every talk page. They wouldn't need to be on pages like for the guideline ones however. I'm sure that it could be set up so that every new talk page has the tag at the top as default. I don't know hot to myself but I know that other wikis have that sort of feature. You are also assuming that the reader has knowledge that they may well not have. Most of the things you listed after "Classification" are personal opinion, apart from repetitive, but thats not always a bad thing. Phalanx-a-pedian 22:57, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

Except I doubt that would be even considered, let alone approved. Talk pages, are and will continue to be, read at your own risk. I see no reason to complicate talk pages by adding something that will not only look ridiculous, but could even be removed at any time. There are even talk pages without spoilers so what would be the point? The current policy stands. Lancer1289 23:09, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

What are you referring to in the first sentence? A community vote? The problem is that not everybody knows or will know that it is, as you say "read at your own risk". I would hardly call it complicating talk pages and I see no reason for it to look ridiculous. Yes it could be removed at any time, but the same is true for all the sites spoiler tags. It would not matter if there were spoilers in the page or not it could simply say something like; "Talk pages are read at your own risk. Spoilers may follow". It's just to warn and educate people. It's just an idea and if it's not too hard to do, it's something that I think would be a nice reader friendly thing to implement. Phalanx-a-pedian 23:19, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

It's a good idea I think, but it probably won't be worth the effort.
First, we'd have to manually apply such a tag (probably would be a general notice warning of the proper use of talk pages and the potential for spoilers to be discussed) to perhaps 2,000 talk pages; I don't think we have a talk page for every article on the wiki, but even if we only have one for half of all of the articles, that's still 1,000 pages. Maybe we could organize a community drive to add the tags. As long as we can spread out the work, it might stand a chance of being fully implemented. I wouldn't bet on it, especially with ME3 so close at hand to distract us, but it's at least doable in theory.
But that's moot. A much, much larger concern is that few if any readers and/or users would take the time to heed such a tag. I've been editing wikis for nearly five years, and in my experience casual readers and users do not pay attention to any notices that a wiki provides, be it in articles or talk pages. They pretty much do whatever they please. Our existing seasoned user base (maybe several dozen people who are online here on a consistent basis) will definitely heed such notices, but they're already aware of the rules and the potential for spoilers. If they're the only ones we reach, then the tags are wasted. Of course, we won't know absolutely until we implement the tags if they work or not, but I'm unwilling to support such a massive endeavor for only the chance of positive returns, returns which may well be negligible. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:59, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

A quick count gives 1554 talk pages (using [1]). The number that would actually need done will be much less, due to being help pages/having had content removed/marked for deletion extra. If it was a simple copy and past job a few users could do it in a single day I would guess. Phalanx-a-pedian 00:12, February 22, 2012 (UTC)