0

I was browsing when I found this question. In the main body, the poster talks about central plot-line, as well as a few other events that happen at the end of a previous title. While the way OP had written it was questioned, some of the events they are talking about are very clear spoilers.

I went through and tagged the correct spoilers, but was told that if information is relevant to the question, it should not be spoiler tagged. If the text is not relevant, my understanding was that it should not be there in the first place.

I have asked questions, before, with spoiler markdown. I have not received any negative feedback - quite the opposite. A lot of what I have found on meta relates to the old spoiler tag that seemed to be in place, instead.

I found this, where the best response seems to be "restrict it to major plot-line", where you have major plot spoiled, or know the fact to be a spoiler. In the case of this question, the user is asking about a major event that acts as a major plot twist in the series. They also talk about an event that only happens at the very end of the second game. I accept the user has used the , but they have also used , applying the question to the entire series.

This is my question (should clarify that I am not asking if I can edit an answer to add spoilers)

So my main question is, what is considered the appropriate use of spoiler markdown in a question / answer? Should it be used in questions at all?

marked as duplicate by Frank, Robotnik, galacticninja, Mathias711, GnomeSlice Aug 3 '15 at 0:11

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 3
    Ignore the accepted answer; it's not as highly voted as @badp's. Which essentially says, it has to make sense without spoilers. – Frank Jul 22 '15 at 0:58
  • not at all what i was asking. He is asking if it is appropriate to edit a question to add spoilers. I am asking for clarification on the correct use of spoilers in a question. Even in badp's response, to quote, "it should not be protected if that's the very piece of spoiler the question is about.". If the spoiler is not relevant to the question, directly, I dont think it should be in there in the first place. – user106385 Jul 22 '15 at 1:27
  • Your scenario is exactly about editing a question with spoilers. I think it's pretty applicable. – Frank Jul 22 '15 at 1:30
  • I was providing context. I am not asking "was I in the right here". Ive clarified my question, including putting it in plain bold text so people that are too lazy to read the whole thing can still what I'm asking. "what is considered the appropriate use of spoiler markdown in a question / answer? Should it be used in questions at all?" – user106385 Jul 22 '15 at 1:49
  • I have to give the case example for context. As I have previously said, it confuses me that "Even if the spoiler is a major one, it should not be protected if that's the very piece of spoiler the question is about." Not because it is a spoiler, but because if the question is not about the spoiler, I can not see any valid reason for it being there in the first place. If not directly related to the question.. or even the answer.. wouldn't it be considered discussion or chit-chat? – user106385 Jul 22 '15 at 1:49
1

This applies to both questions and answers:

Spoiler Markup should be used to cover up accidental spoilers. Imagine you clicked the question to read about A, and got spoiled about C: plot-related stuff tangential to the question/answer, which is mainly there for context or to build up to a larger point.

The post should be able to stand on its own without the spoiler - In the case you're describing, your changes made it impossible to read the question.

Without opening the spoiler areas at least.

^That is an good example. The text above it can stand on it's own without the spoiler'd text - the spoiler just adds a bit more to the post.

In general, users should know what you're talking about without needing to open the spoiler. However:

This is bad. You shouldn't have had to mouseover this to read more into the 'However' point.

As a working example, in the question you cite, this is what I probably would've done (bear in mind I've never played Assassin's Creed):

Why doesn't the Templar Order care about the 2nd disaster?

The templars know that the 2nd disaster is coming.

Especially after accessing the ancestral memories of Desmond, Clay Kazmercik and Daniel Cross, and observing the interactions between the ancestors and the First Civilization.

A comic even tells us that Daniel Cross read Minerva's prophecy from the Prophet's Codex to Vidic himself.

So why do they not care at all that a world-changing event is about to destroy what they care about most - order?

Could it be possible that in addition to controlling the world, the Templar Satellite also was designed to prevent the 2012 coronal mass ejection?


The only thing spoilered is the 'accidental' spoiler that hey, these Templar folk accessed some memories of (I'm guessing) the main characters: The rest of the question is about the 'second disaster', the coronal mass ejection, so it shouldn't be spoilered - it's the entire point of the question.