Talk:Source Code/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Source Code. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Spoiler
Deleted the following lines
"In his final trips, Captain Stevens begins to suspect that he -- or more specifically Sean (whose body he inhabits) -- is the bomber."
Seemed like a spoiler to me, not a very good idea to have it in the article, especially with the movie release so far away. 188.200.73.137 (talk) 09:53, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- See WP:SPOILER. Wikipedia does not avoid spoilers. If people don't want the plot revealed, perhaps they shouldn't read the plot section of the film's article on an encyclopaedia. Geoff B (talk) 16:51, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- For an unreleased movie, I expect to read enough of the plot for me to make up my mind about whether I want to keep it on my radar to see it when it comes out. That doesn't seem unrealistic. How many other upcoming movie listing sites spoil a key part of the story for a movie that isn't due out until next year? Furthermore, I don't think Wikipedia's spoiler policy is thought out enough for unreleased media. What are the authoritative sources that reveal the full plot of the story, if there's no book to go by e.g.? How do we even know that this ending will be part of the movie? Maybe if it's posted to prominently on Wikipedia, the producers decide to alter it? Consider what the intent of the majority of the visitors of the page is. They didn't come here to be spoiled. They came to be find out if an upcoming project is interesting. Jschuur (talk) 08:08, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
- I'm reverting the spoiler again, on the grounds that you cannot cite verifiable sources for the ending of the movie. We may differ in opinion on whether the spoiler policy makes sense to apply equally for released and unreleased works, but verifiability of the content still ranks higher than the spoiler policy. Per the WP:V, the burden of proof lies with the editor adding content. Cite your reliable source for the full plot and note the requirement that these sources need to have a 'reputation for fact-checking and accuracy'. Until such proof can be provided, it's the responsibility of the person posting the disputed content to not restore it. Jschuur (talk) 09:19, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
- For an unreleased movie, I expect to read enough of the plot for me to make up my mind about whether I want to keep it on my radar to see it when it comes out. That doesn't seem unrealistic. How many other upcoming movie listing sites spoil a key part of the story for a movie that isn't due out until next year? Furthermore, I don't think Wikipedia's spoiler policy is thought out enough for unreleased media. What are the authoritative sources that reveal the full plot of the story, if there's no book to go by e.g.? How do we even know that this ending will be part of the movie? Maybe if it's posted to prominently on Wikipedia, the producers decide to alter it? Consider what the intent of the majority of the visitors of the page is. They didn't come here to be spoiled. They came to be find out if an upcoming project is interesting. Jschuur (talk) 08:08, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Oh, ok, thank you for pointing out. Do you think a "spoiler warning" should be added? 188.200.73.137 (talk) 23:28, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Jesus people...you just spoiled the movie for me. Now I'm sad...and I agree with Jschuur, people do read the plot/synopsis for unreleased movies to get an idea of what its about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.247.20.56 (talk) 20:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- What did you expect to find in the plot section of a film's article in an encyclopaedia? Your own fault, stop blaming others for your own actions, and develop a sense of responsibility. Geoff B (talk) 20:59, 26 December 2010 (UTC)